FALCON METALS LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2024

Mar 3, 2024

==> picture [596 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

ASX / Media Announcement
----- End of picture text -----

4 March 2024

High-grade Mineral Sands Intersected at Pyramid Hill

• Results received for a reconnaissance drilling program for mineral sands at Pyramid Hill with highlights from the Farrelly Prospect including:

• PHAC1803 17m @ 9.8% THM from 12m; including ▪ 11m @ 14.4% THM from 16m; that also includes • 1m @ 21.6% THM from 16m; and • 7m @ 16.8% THM from 19m • PHAC1804 18m @ 5.5% THM from 13m; including ▪ 7m @ 10.7%% THM from 20m; that also includes • 4m @ 12.0% THM from 22m • PHAC1790 6m @ 4.8% THM from 8m; including ▪ 1m @ 9.6% THM from 8m • PHAC1789 7m @ 2.1% THM from 10m • PHAC1788 4m @ 2.9% THM from 11m

• The high-grade Farrelly Prospect is open in all directions, with follow up aircore drilling planned to determine the orientation and scale of the prospect

• Visual mineralogical assessment has identified encouraging levels of potentially valuable heavy minerals including zircon, rutile and ilmenite

• Monazite was also observed, which is known to contain Rare Earth Elements (REE), considered critical metals for clean energy technologies, with further test work required to quantify grade and REE content

• Additional metallurgical work is required to determine the quality of the Valuable Heavy Minerals (VHM) which is important in understanding the significance of the identified mineralisation

• Several other areas of mineral sands mineralisation were intersected that require further assessment

• Gold exploration continues at Pyramid Hill with aircore drilling ongoing, including infilling areas of previously announced anomalous results, as well as the reconnaissance screening program to identify new prospects

Falcon Metals Limited ( ASX: FAL ) ( “Falcon” or “the Company” ) advises that it has received results for select samples from a 77-hole aircore program at its Pyramid Hill Project in Victoria (see Figure 1), focused on assessing two permits for mineral sands and associated REE. Although the permits drilled were initially explored for gold, Falcon recognised the potential for mineral sands mineralisation after completing a review of historical work on areas where the Murray Basin cover is considered prospective for mineral sands. The review of previous work carried out in the 1970s and 1980s identified specific targets that were selected for testing in this program. Although widespread mineral sands mineralisation was noted by these previous explorers, the depth of testing and the sporadic nature of sampling and subsequent analysis means this data is not of sufficient quality to be used. It

Falcon Metals Limited ASX: FAL Level 6, 350 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000 PO Box 106, Flinders Lane VIC 8009

T : +61 3 8648 6684 E : info@falconmetals.com.au www.falconmetals.com.au ABN 87 651 893 097

1

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

was also noted that this work did not adequately test for the presence of higher-grade strandline-type deposits. Falcon’s targeting was specifically focused on finding these higher-grade zones within the areas selected.

Several holes at the newly named Farrelly Prospect returned high-grade results, with detailed grain counting and sachet scanning recording encouraging levels of valuable heavy minerals, including elevated zircon and rutile. Although monazite is present, further work is also needed to accurately quantify the amount of this mineral and the associated REE mineralisation. Falcon is planning a second phase of work on this prospect involving follow-up drilling, metallurgical test work and detailed mineralogical assessment.

Anomalous minerals sands were also intersected at the Marmal Prospect in line with historical results. Several drill holes in the northwest of EL007120 confirmed the presence of mineral sands in areas that had not been previously explored. Falcon will await further mineralogical assessment to determine if additional work is warranted on these lower priority areas.

Falcon Metals’ Managing Director Tim Markwell said:

“The intersection of these high-grade zones of mineral sands in the Murray Basin is a positive development for Falcon, and this initial short program of drilling is in addition to the gold exploration program that is ongoing. Our focus will undoubtedly remain on gold, to vector in on potential highgrade discoveries in one of the world’s great gold provinces.

It is easy to forget we are also in a mineral sands province where several companies are in the process of developing large projects. Falcon will take the initiative to further assess the mineral sands potential off the back of these results and look for ways to create additional value for shareholders.”

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

2

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [442 x 388] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 Location map of the mineral sands drilling at Pyramid Hill

Reconnaissance Aircore Program

A review of the Falcon land position in Victoria for critical minerals identified several areas with known mineral sands and related REE potential in the Murry Basin cover in EL006864 and EL007120. Victoria is a known mineral sands province with several large projects currently in development phase. In the Victorian Murray Basin, there are at least five known mineral sands deposits with published JORC Resources. These are noted below in Table 1, with three of the nearby deposits shown in Figure 1.

In October 2023 Falcon completed 77 reconnaissance aircore holes for 3,461m across EL006864 and EL007120 on the most prospective areas of these permits. Select samples were sent to Diamantina Laboratories in Western Australia for Heavy Media Separation (HMS) test work to determine the Total Heavy Mineral (THM) content of the samples. Given anomalous results were returned, a second phase of work was conducted to determine the mineral suite to check on the Valuable Heavy Mineral (VHM) content which is critical in determining the significance of the results. This was a two-step process with detailed grain counting completed on a small subset of the results (ten samples), and the results used to complete a faster sachet scanning process to provide a high-level gauge on the broader mineral sands suite. All samples that returned >1 THM% were sent for sachet scanning. This level of work is considered sufficient to provide Falcon with enough information to determine next steps for any areas considered prospective. On the plan maps showing the mineral sands results, <3 VHM% x metres is considered to have low potential.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

3

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Table 1 Mineral Sands Deposits with Published JORC Resources

Company - Deposit	Mt	THM%	Zircon	Rutile	Leucoxene	Ilmenite	Monazite	Xenotime	VHM%6	In Situ VHM%7
ACDC Metals1 - Goschen Central	628	1.9%	24%	9%	12%	23%	4%	0.5%	73%	1.4%
Astron – Donald2	2,634	4.6%	18%	8%	18%	31%	2%	-	77%	3.5%
Iluka – WIM3	1,380	5.0%	16%	5%	6%	33%	2%	0.4%	62%	3.1%
VHM Ltd – Goschen4	837	3.0%	21%	11%	12%	18%	3%	0.7%	67%	2.0%
Wim Resources - Wedderburn5	223	2.9%	21%	14%	17%	33%	2%	-	87%	2.5%

1 "ACDC Metals RIU Conference Presentation" released to ASX 14 February 2024

2 “Astron 2023 Annual Report” released to ASX on 29 September 2023

3 “Iluka Revised Announcement - Wimmera Development Progress” released to ASX 22 February 2024

4 "VHM 1H FY24 Results Presentation" released to ASX 28 February 2024

5 https://wimresource.com.au/project/wedderburn-hms/ 6 VHM% is calculated by adding Zircon, Rutile, Leucoxene and Ilmenite (Note: This preliminary scanning does not include Monazite or Xenotime)

7 In Situ VHM% is calculated by THM% multiplied by VHM%

Farrelly Prospect

Several high-grade results were returned from the Farrelly Prospect (see Figures 2 and 3) with holes PHAC1803 and PHAC1804 returning the best results from the program. These holes were drilled on an east-west roadside, 200m apart, and were the only holes drilled in this area by Falcon.

• PHAC1803 17m @ 9.8% THM from 12m; including

▪ 11m @ 14.4% THM from 16m; that also includes

• 1m @ 21.6% THM from 16m; and • 7m @ 16.8% THM from 19m

• PHAC1804 18m @ 5.5% THM from 13m; including ▪ 7m @ 10.7%% THM from 20m; that also includes • 4m @ 12.0% THM from 22m

Over 5km north-northeast of these results, Falcon drilled a further three holes 200m apart which also returned anomalous results.

• PHAC1790 6m @ 4.8% THM from 8m; including

▪ 1m @ 9.6% THM from 8m • PHAC1789 7m @ 2.1%% THM from 10m • PHAC1788 4m @ 2.9% THM from 11m

Although it is too early to determine if both lines of drilling are part of the same mineralised zone, it provides a compelling target for exploration given the shallow high-grade mineralisation. Falcon is well advanced with planning for infill and extensional drilling to investigate the extent and geometry of the high-grade mineralisation at the Farrelly Prospect. It is expected that this drilling will commence in the coming week.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

4

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [452 x 453] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 Location of Farrelly Prospect

The sachet scanning of samples from the Farrelly Prospect confirmed that a suite of VHM is present in the high-grade areas. Some of the insitu VHM% grades are encouraging, particularly PHAC1803 with 17m @ 9.8% VHM from 12m (see Table 2). Given the high-grade of the Farrelly Prospect, the heavy mineral content is potentially significant with zircon ranging from 14% to 25%, rutile 5% to 13% and ilmenite 20% to 36%.

Grain counting was completed for five one-metre intervals from the Farrelly Prospect (Appendix 3) and this confirmed the presence of monazite (a REE bearing mineral, of which REE’s are considered critical metals for clean energy technologies), with values varying from 0.5% to 2.5% (See Table 3). It was noted by the mineralogist that accurately quantifying monazite is better suited to other techniques and additional mineralogical test work will provide more confidence in the abundance of monazite and the presence of xenotime throughout the mineral sands in Falcon’s tenements.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

5

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [423 x 324] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [421 x 290] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 Cross-sections A-B and C-D through the Farrelly Prospect

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

6

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Table 2 Mineral suite results from sachet scanning from the Farrelly Prospect (VHM>1%)

Hole ID	From	To	Interval	THM%	Zircon	Rutile	Leucoxene	Ilmenite	VHM%1	In Situ VHM%2
PHAC1788	11	15	4	2.9%	29%	10%	5%	31%	75%	2.2%
PHAC1789	10	17	7	2.1%	22%	13%	11%	36%	82%	1.7%
PHAC1790	8	14	6	4.8%	17%	5%	5%	18%	45%	2.2%
PHAC1803	12	29	17	9.8%	17%	7%	5%	26%	55%	5.4%
incl.	16	27	11	14.4%	20%	7%	5%	27%	59%	8.5%
that also incl.	16	17	1	21.6%	25%	10%	5%	20%	60%	13.0%
and	19	26	7	16.8%	20%	6%	5%	29%	60%	10.1%
PHAC1804	13	31	18	5.5%	14%	9%	5%	22%	50%	2.8%
incl.	20	27	7	10.7%	15%	11%	5%	24%	55%	5.9%
that also incl.	22	26	4	12.0%	15%	10%	5%	24%	54%	6.5%

1VHM% is calculated by adding Zircon, Rutile, Leucoxene and Ilmenite (Note: This preliminary scanning does not include Monazite or Xenotime) 2In Situ VHM% is calculated by THM% multiplied by VHM%

The THM analysis was done on the 38µm to 1mm size fraction as is standard practice in reporting mineral sands results. Further studies to test for the THM and VHM abundance of the 20µm to 38µm fine fraction will be investigated.

Table 3 Grain counting results for select samples from the Farrelly Prospect showing preliminary monazite grades

Hole ID	From	To	Width	THM%	Monazite%	Total VHM%
PHAC1788	12	13	1	3.7	1.0	81
PHAC1789	11	12	1	4.6	2.5	93
PHAC1790	13	14	1	2.4	0.5	55
PHAC1803	20	21	1	9.7	1.0	65
PHAC1804	20	21	1	17.0	0.5	54

Marmal Prospect

The Marmal Prospect was identified by Aberfoyle Resources in the late 1980’s and infill drilling was completed but the available data was not of appropriate detail to develop an exploration target. Drilling completed by Falcon confirmed the presence of a low-grade but generally shallow prospect with a high percentage of VHM. There is some scope to increase the scale of the prospect to the south where more consistent zones of mineralisation were encountered in consecutive holes (see Figure 4), however, this target is a lower priority than the Farrelly Prospect.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

7

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [452 x 452] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 Plan map of the Marmal Prospect

Regional Results

An area in the northwest of EL007120 was targeted for drilling because it had never been explored but appeared to be the possible southern extension of a strandline that is held by Iluka Resources (ASX: ILU) under a retention licence. Although these results were not as encouraging as the Farrelly Prospect, they did highlight that some mineral sands potential does exist within the western part of EL007120 (See Figure 5).

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

8

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [452 x 354] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 Plan map of the drilling in the northwest of EL007120

Next Steps

Drilling is expected to recommence at the Farrelly Prospect by the end of the week. This program will involve the collection of sufficient material to allow for more advanced metallurgical test work to be undertaken.

It is anticipated that this program will take approximately one week to complete and then the rig will return to the gold exploration program.

Results from the other zones of anomalous mineralisation will be reviewed and further test work undertaken to determine which areas are sufficiently prospective to warrant follow up drilling.

This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Falcon Metals.

For more information, please contact:

Tim Markwell Ben Creagh Managing Director Media and Investor Queries tmarkwell@falconmetals.com.au benc@nwrcommunications.com.au

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

9

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

COMPETENT PERSON STATEMENT:

The information contained within this announcement relates to exploration results based on and fairly represents information compiled and reviewed by Mr Greg Jones, a Competent Person who is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM). Mr Jones is an employee of IHC Mining and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Jones consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENT:

This announcement may contain certain forward-looking statements, guidance, forecasts, estimates, prospects, projections or statements in relation to future matters that may involve risks or uncertainties and may involve significant items of subjective judgement and assumptions of future events that may or may not eventuate (Forward Statements). Forward Statements can generally be identified by the use of forward looking words such as "anticipate", "estimates", "will", "should", "could", "may", "expects", "plans", "forecast", "target" or similar expressions and may include, without limitation, statements regarding plans, strategies and objectives of management, anticipated production and expected costs. Indications of, and guidance on future earnings, cash flows, costs, financial position and performance are also forward looking statements. Forward looking statements, opinions and estimates included in this announcement are based on assumptions and contingencies which are subject to change, without notice, as are statements about market and industry trends, which are based on interpretation of current market conditions. Forward looking statements are provided as a general guide only and should not be relied on as a guarantee of future performance.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

10

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 1: Details for aircore drill holes with results available in this announcement

Prospect		Easting	Northing	RL			Azimuth	Dip	Depth
	Hole ID				Zone	Grid
		(m)	(m)	(m)			UTM (°)	(°)	(m)
Marmal	PHAC1739	729714	5993505	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	97
Marmal	PHAC1740	729547.8	5993535	108	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Marmal	PHAC1741	729339.5	5993567	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	130
Marmal	PHAC1742	729147.4	5993594	106	54	GDA94	0	-90	48
Marmal	PHAC1743	729955.4	5993465	108	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Marmal	PHAC1744	730334.2	5993401	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Marmal	PHAC1745	730756.7	5993331	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Marmal	PHAC1746	728830.7	5990339	120	54	GDA94	0	-90	54
Marmal	PHAC1747	729025	5990308	119	54	GDA94	0	-90	48
Marmal	PHAC1748	729225.4	5990313	118	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Marmal	PHAC1749	729287.9	5990693	116	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Marmal	PHAC1750	729352.4	5991101	118	54	GDA94	0	-90	30
Marmal	PHAC1751	729418.2	5991489	117	54	GDA94	0	-90	30
Marmal	PHAC1752	729485.9	5991905	115	54	GDA94	0	-90	30
Marmal	PHAC1753	729548.1	5992289	113	54	GDA94	0	-90	24
Marmal	PHAC1754	729611.7	5992680	109	54	GDA94	0	-90	27
Marmal	PHAC1755	729797.2	5993834	106	54	GDA94	0	-90	42
Marmal	PHAC1756	729869.1	5994263	106	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Marmal	PHAC1757	729927.9	5994654	105	54	GDA94	0	-90	42
Marmal	PHAC1758	730657.1	5991685	110	54	GDA94	0	-90	27
Marmal	PHAC1759	730448.2	5991719	110	54	GDA94	0	-90	32
Marmal	PHAC1760	730261	5991749	111	54	GDA94	0	-90	24
Marmal	PHAC1761	730053.5	5991781	115	54	GDA94	0	-90	21
Marmal	PHAC1762	729870.6	5991825	117	54	GDA94	0	-90	27
Marmal	PHAC1763	729687.7	5991840	117	54	GDA94	0	-90	30
Marmal	PHAC1764	729280.3	5991910	114	54	GDA94	0	-90	30
Marmal	PHAC1765	729078.1	5991942	114	54	GDA94	0	-90	27
Marmal	PHAC1766	728900.8	5991973	114	54	GDA94	0	-90	27
Marmal	PHAC1767	728692.7	5992006	114	54	GDA94	0	-90	24
Marmal	PHAC1768	728506.3	5992038	115	54	GDA94	0	-90	76
Marmal	PHAC1769	728289.4	5992072	115	54	GDA94	0	-90	24
Marmal	PHAC1770	728091.5	5992102	113	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Marmal	PHAC1771	727901.5	5992136	112	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Marmal	PHAC1772	727711.7	5992168	112	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Marmal	PHAC1773	727505.2	5992202	112	54	GDA94	0	-90	51

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

11

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Prospect		Easting	Northing	RL			Azimuth	Dip	Depth
	Hole ID				Zone	Grid
		(m)	(m)	(m)			UTM (°)	(°)	(m)
Marmal	PHAC1774	727816.4	5991734	114	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Marmal	PHAC1775	727753.2	5991342	117	54	GDA94	0	-90	54
Marmal	PHAC1776	727689.1	5990944	120	54	GDA94	0	-90	57
Douglas Rd	PHAC1777	722296.5	5990709	118	54	GDA94	0	-90	61
Douglas Rd	PHAC1778	722223.8	5990710	118	54	GDA94	0	-90	42
Douglas Rd	PHAC1779	722413.2	5990705	118	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Marmal	PHAC1780	730124.7	5993431	109	54	GDA94	0	-90	111
Marmal	PHAC1781	730518.9	5993371	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	73
Marmal	PHAC1782	728788.3	5995360	105	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Marmal	PHAC1783	728981.5	5995366	105	54	GDA94	0	-90	83
Marmal	PHAC1784	729206.9	5995352	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Marmal	PHAC1785	729438.2	5995312	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	79
Marmal	PHAC1786	729597.2	5995280	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Marmal	PHAC1787	729844.7	5995245	106	54	GDA94	0	-90	113
Farrelly	PHAC1788	744754.3	5991870	94	54	GDA94	0	-90	52
Farrelly	PHAC1789	744924	5991841	94	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1790	745097	5991808	94	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1791	737457	5984703	131	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1792	737635.8	5984670	131	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1793	737847.3	5984637	130	54	GDA94	0	-90	48
Farrelly	PHAC1794	738032.9	5984605	129	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1795	738240.7	5984573	128	54	GDA94	0	-90	48
Farrelly	PHAC1796	738454.7	5984551	127	54	GDA94	0	-90	66
Farrelly	PHAC1797	738360	5984828	127	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1798	738258.2	5985127	127	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1799	738442.3	5985015	126	54	GDA94	0	-90	42
Farrelly	PHAC1800	738640.6	5984958	125	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Farrelly	PHAC1801	738830.7	5984951	124	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Farrelly	PHAC1802	739035	5984896	123	54	GDA94	0	-90	45
Farrelly	PHAC1803	742496.7	5986534	107	54	GDA94	0	-90	42
Farrelly	PHAC1804	742296.8	5986580	108	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Ryans Rd	PHAC1805	689641.5	6005447	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	57
Barbers Rd	PHAC1806	683550.4	6004696	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	49
Barbers Rd	PHAC1807	683195.6	6004746	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	39
Barbers Rd	PHAC1808	682793	6004809	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Barbers Rd	PHAC1809	682401.1	6004856	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Barbers Rd	PHAC1810	682005.1	6004914	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	33

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

12

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Prospect		Easting	Northing	RL			Azimuth	Dip	Depth
	Hole ID				Zone	Grid
		(m)	(m)	(m)			UTM (°)	(°)	(m)
Barbers Rd	PHAC1811	681611.7	6004970	105	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Barbers Rd	PHAC1812	681310.9	6005129	105	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Barbers Rd	PHAC1813	680940.7	6005317	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	33
Barbers Rd	PHAC1814	680582.5	6005498	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	36
Barbers Rd	PHAC1815	680225.4	6005677	104	54	GDA94	0	-90	36

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

13

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 2: Pyramid Hill significant aircore drill intersections (>1% VHM)

Target	HoleID	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	THM	>1mm	<38um	Zircon	Rutile	Leucoxene	Ilmenite	VHM	In Situ VHM
Marmal	PHAC1743	9.0	12.0	3	1.6%	0%	26%	10%	7%	30%	18%	65%	1.0%
Marmal	PHAC1746	26.0	28.0	2	1.5%	6%	22%	25%	10%	18%	18%	70%	1.0%
Marmal	PHAC1747	18.0	19.0	1	1.3%	53%	25%	30%	10%	15%	20%	75%	1.0%
Marmal	and	21.0	23.0	2	1.6%	1%	27%	33%	10%	18%	20%	80%	1.3%
Marmal	PHAC1748	16.0	21.0	5	1.4%	3%	27%	21%	12%	19%	26%	78%	1.1%
Marmal	PHAC1749	12.0	15.0	3	1.9%	6%	27%	32%	8%	17%	22%	78%	1.5%
Marmal	PHAC1750	14.0	15.0	1	1.3%	4%	33%	25%	10%	25%	20%	80%	1.1%
Marmal	PHAC1751	9.0	13.0	4	1.7%	4%	29%	29%	8%	18%	25%	79%	1.3%
Marmal	PHAC1752	16.0	17.0	1	1.7%	16%	27%	15%	10%	15%	30%	70%	1.2%
Marmal	PHAC1754	8.0	9.0	1	1.5%	80%	29%	25%	15%	15%	25%	80%	1.2%
Marmal	PHAC1757	6.0	9.0	3	1.6%	3%	29%	17%	10%	17%	30%	73%	1.2%
Marmal	and	14.0	18.0	4	2.0%	3%	27%	10%	13%	16%	29%	68%	1.3%
Marmal	PHAC1764	8.0	9.0	1	1.4%	0%	33%	15%	10%	20%	25%	70%	1.0%
Marmal	PHAC1766	8.0	11.0	3	1.7%	0%	32%	30%	10%	15%	25%	80%	1.4%
Marmal	and	17.0	19.0	2	2.4%	8%	34%	15%	8%	15%	23%	60%	1.4%
Marmal	PHAC1771	15.0	18.0	3	1.4%	2%	19%	17%	10%	25%	25%	77%	1.1%
Marmal	PHAC1773	27.0	31.0	4	4.8%	16%	30%	15%	5%	6%	11%	38%	1.8%
Douglas Rd	PHAC1777	31.0	32.0	1	3.0%	20%	27%	10%	5%	10%	20%	45%	1.3%
Marmal	PHAC1780	6.0	9.0	3	1.4%	5%	27%	32%	10%	15%	25%	82%	1.2%
Marmal	and	12.0	13.0	1	1.5%	11%	26%	30%	10%	15%	25%	80%	1.2%
Farrelly	PHAC1788	11.0	15.0	4	2.9%	8%	42%	29%	10%	5%	31%	75%	2.2%
Farrelly	PHAC1789	10.0	17.0	7	2.1%	3%	42%	22%	13%	11%	36%	81%	1.7%
Farrelly	PHAC1790	8.0	14.0	6	4.8%	13%	49%	17%	5%	5%	18%	45%	2.2%
Farrelly	incl.	8.0	9.0	1	9.6%	44%	33%	5%	5%	0%	5%	15%	1.4%
Farrelly	PHAC1792	17.0	18.0	1	1.2%	7%	28%	25%	15%	15%	30%	85%	1.0%
Farrelly	PHAC1793	13.0	15.0	2	5.6%	32%	37%	8%	5%	5%	13%	30%	1.7%
Farrelly	and	18.0	19.0	1	1.4%	30%	48%	30%	10%	15%	25%	80%	1.1%
Farrelly	PHAC1794	14.0	15.0	1	1.6%	65%	21%	30%	10%	10%	30%	80%	1.3%
Farrelly	PHAC1795	12.0	13.0	1	2.7%	0%	32%	25%	15%	15%	25%	80%	2.1%
Farrelly	PHAC1797	14.0	15.0	1	1.8%	5%	35%	35%	10%	10%	25%	80%	1.4%
Farrelly	PHAC1798	12.0	14.0	2	1.5%	11%	26%	28%	10%	18%	25%	80%	1.2%
Farrelly	PHAC1799	13.0	14.0	1	2.4%	6%	41%	25%	15%	20%	25%	85%	2.1%
Farrelly	PHAC1801	20.0	21.0	1	4.7%	42%	22%	15%	5%	0%	10%	30%	1.4%
Farrelly	PHAC1802	20.0	21.0	1	4.1%	19%	25%	5%	5%	5%	15%	30%	1.2%
Farrelly	and	22.0	23.0	1	1.5%	6%	30%	30%	10%	15%	25%	80%	1.2%
Farrelly	PHAC1803	12.0	29.0	17	9.8%	22%	34%	17%	7%	5%	26%	55%	5.5%
Farrelly	incl.	16.0	27.0	11	14.4%	25%	35%	20%	7%	5%	27%	59%	8.5%
Farrelly	that also incl.	16.0	17.0	1	21.6%	37%	32%	25%	10%	5%	20%	60%	13.0%
Farrelly	and	19.0	26.0	7	16.8%	14%	40%	20%	6%	5%	29%	60%	10.1%

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

14

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Target	HoleID	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	THM	>1mm	<38um	Zircon	Rutile	Leucoxene	Ilmenite	VHM	In Situ VHM
Farrelly	PHAC1804	13.0	31.0	18	5.5%	12%	43%	14%	9%	5%	22%	50%	2.7%
Farrelly	incl.	20.0	27.0	7	10.7%	19%	35%	15%	11%	5%	24%	55%	5.9%
Farrelly	that also incl.	22.0	26.0	4	12.0%	23%	35%	15%	10%	5%	24%	54%	6.5%
Ryans Rd	PHAC1805	30.0	36.0	6	4.5%	7%	35%	9%	5%	8%	15%	37%	1.7%
Ryans Rd	incl.	33.0	36.0	3	7.1%	12%	37%	8%	5%	5%	13%	32%	2.3%
Barbers Rd	PHAC1812	19.0	20.0	1	1.3%	1%	26%	10%	10%	35%	25%	80%	1.0%
Barbers Rd	and	24.0	28.0	4	1.5%	1%	23%	15%	15%	15%	29%	74%	1.1%
Barbers Rd	PHAC1813	18.0	21.0	3	1.6%	2%	24%	32%	12%	13%	23%	80%	1.3%
Barbers Rd	and	25.0	26.0	1	1.6%	1%	26%	35%	10%	10%	25%	80%	1.3%

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

15

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 3: Farrelly Prospect grain counting results

Hole ID	PHAC1788	PHAC1789	PHAC1790	PHAC1804	PHAC1803
Depth	12-13m	11-12m	13-14m	20-21m	20-21m
THM%	3.69%	4.61%	2.40%	9.66%	16.95%
Sample Number	MS00725	MS00744	MS00760	MS00883	MS00919
Ilmenite Product %	36	49	26	33	32
Ilmenite	1	0	0	2	3
Alt. Ilmenite	7	1	1	19	19
Pseudo Rutile	28	48	25	12	10
Leucoxene Product %	5	8	7	2	2
Leucoxene	5	8	7	2	2
Rutile Product %	11	15	7	3	5
Anatase	8	10	4	2	3
Rutile	3	5	2	2	2
Zircon Product %	29	19	16	25	16
Zircon	29	19	16	25	16
Monazite%	1	3	1	1	1
Total VHM%	81	93	56	65	54

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

16

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 4: JORC Table 1 – Pyramid Hill – Mineral Sands

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques •	Nature and quality of sampling (eg. cut •	The aircore samples were collected every metre.
	channels, random chips, or specific •	A rotary splitter attached to the cyclone was used to collect
	specialised industry standard measurement	a representative sample of each interval drilled into a calico
	tools appropriate to the minerals under	bag with the remainder of the sample collected in a bucket
	investigation, such as down hole gamma	and laid out on a tarp in sequential order.
	sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). •	A handful of sample from each interval was panned to
	These examples should not be taken as	estimate THM% and SLIMES% by the rig geologist.
	limiting the broad meaning of sampling. •	Based on the results of the panning sample intervals were
•	Include reference to measures taken to	selected.
	ensure sample representivity and the
	appropriate calibration of any measurement
	tools or systems used.
•	Aspects of the determination of
	mineralisation that are Material to the Public
	Report.
•	In cases where ‘industry 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
	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 techniques •	Drill type (eg. core, reverse circulation, open- •	The Aircore drilling was completed by Bostech Drilling
	hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,	Australia using face sampling blade bits with a diameter of
	sonic, etc) and details (eg. core diameter,	85mm
	triple or standard tube, depth of diamond •	NQ diameter drill rods were used
	tails, face-sampling bit or other type, •	All holes drilled vertically
	whether core is oriented and if so, by what •	Aircore is considered a standard industry technique for
	method, etc).	heavymineral sand exploration.
Drill sample recovery •	Method of recording and assessing core and •	Aircore samples were recorded as wet or dry, and samples
	chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	with low recovery were recorded.
•	Measures taken to maximise sample •	Geologists were checking for any signs of downhole
	recovery and ensure representative nature of	contamination, and this was noted.
	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 have been •	The aircore chips were logged and sampled at the rig with
	geologically and geotechnically logged to a	the entire hole being logged.
	level of detail to support appropriate Mineral •	The samples were qualitatively logged via digital entry into
	Resource estimation, mining studies and	a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
	metallurgical studies. •	The logging consisted of lithology, colour, grainsize,
•	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative	sorting, hardness, sample condition, washability, estimated
	in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc)	THM% and SLIMES%. A mineral sands consultant was
	photography.	present at the commencement of the project to ensure
•	The total length and percentage of the	that the rig geologists were trained in the logging of
	relevant intersections logged.	mineral sands.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

17

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sub-sampling •	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether •	Field duplicates were collected every 40thsample for the
techniques and	quarter, half or all core taken.	mineral sands aircore drilling.
sample preparation •	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 beingsampled.
Quality of assay data •	The nature, quality and appropriateness of •	For the aircore drilling 1m samples were routinely collected
and laboratory tests	the assaying and laboratory procedures used	of all the zones with mineral sands identified from panning.
	and whether the technique is considered •	Field duplicates were collected every 40thsample for the
	partial or total.	mineral sands aircore drilling.
•	For geophysical tools, spectrometers, •	Field standards were collected every 40thsample for the
	handheld XRF instruments, etc, the	mineral sands drilling.
	parameters used in determining the analysis •	Samples were submitted to Diamantina
	including instrument make and model, •	Samples were transported to Diamantina laboratory for
	reading times, calibrations factors applied	assaying.
	and their derivation, etc. •	Diamantina is considered to be a mineral sands industry
•	Nature of quality control procedures adopted	leading laboratory.
	(eg. standards, blanks, duplicates, external •	Samples were weighed by Diamantina laboratory on arrival.
	laboratory checks) and whether acceptable	The laboratory sample was dried for up to 24 hours @ 105
	levels of accuracy (ie. lack of bias) and	– 110 degrees Celsius.
	precision have been established. •	The sample was loosened until friable and passed through a
		rotary splitter to take 250 g sub-sample.
	•	This sub-sample is then wet screened on a Sweco vibrating
		screen deck at a top aperture of 1 mm (oversize ‘OS’) and a
		bottom screen of 38 µm (SLIMES fraction).
	•	The sand fraction containing the THM (-1 mm and +38 µm)
		is then dried and a sub-split of approximately 100 g is taken
		using a micro riffle splitter and used for heavy liquid
		separation using funnels and a heavy liquid,
		Tetrabromoethane (TBE), with a density of between 2.92
		and 2.96 gcm-3 to determine total heavy mineral (THM)
		content.
	•	This is considered to be an industry standard technique.
	•	Field duplicates and the HM standards are inserted into the
		sample string at a frequency rate of 1 per 40 primary
		samples.
	•	Diamantina also completed their own internal QA/QC
		checks by inserting laboratory repeats at a rate of 1 in 40
		and the insertion of Standard Certified Reference Material
		at a rate of 1 in 40.
Verification of •	The verification of significant intersections by •	Significant intersections are checked by the Exploration
sampling and	either independent or alternative company	Manager. Significant intersections are cross-checked with
assaying	personnel.	the geology logged after assays are received.
•	The use of twinned holes. •	No twin holes have been drilled for comparative purposes.
•	Documentation of primary data, data entry	The targets are still considered to be in an early exploration
	procedures, data verification, data storage	stage.
	(physical and electronic) protocols. •	Primarydata was digitallycollected and entered via a field

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

18

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
•	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Toughbook computer using in house logging codes. The
		data is sent to the database manager where the data is
		validated and loaded into the master database.
	•	No adjustments have been made to the assay data
		received.
Location of data •	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to •	Hole collar locations have been picked up by Falcon
points	locate drill holes (collar and down-hole	employees using a handheld GPS with a +/- 3m error.
	surveys), trenches, mine workings and other •	The grid system used for the location of the drill holes is
	locations used in Mineral Resource	MGA_GDA94 (Zone 54 or Zone 55).
	estimation. •	RL data have been assigned from 10m DEM satellite data.
•	Specification of the grid system used.
•	Qualityand adequacyof topographic control.
Data spacing and •	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration •	Spacing of the aircore drilling varies. The drilling was
distribution	Results.	designed to test anomalous results from historical mineral
•	Whether the data spacing and distribution is	sands drilling.
	sufficient to establish the degree of •	The current spacing is not considered sufficient to assume
	geological and grade continuity appropriate	any geological or grade continuity of the results intersected.
	for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve	No sample compositing has been applied.
	estimation procedure(s) and classifications
	applied.
•	Whether sample compositing has been
	applied.
Orientation of data in •	Whether the orientation of sampling •	Drilling was all vertical and is not considered to introduce
relation to geological	achieves unbiased sampling of possible	any sampling bias.
structure	structures and the extent to which this is •	Drilling was conducted along existing roads.
	known, considering the deposit 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 security •	The measures taken to ensure sample •	Samples are stored on site and were shipped to Diamantina
	security.	bya freight agent.
Audits or reviews •	The results of any audits or reviews of •	No review has been carried out to date.
	samplingtechniques and data.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

19

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement •	Type, reference name/number, location and •	Drilling was carried out within EL006864 and
and land tenure	ownership including agreements or material	EL007120. These licences are wholly owned by Falcon
status	issues with third parties such as joint ventures,	Gold Resources Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of
	partnerships, overriding royalties, native title	Falcon Metals Limited with no known encumbrances.
	interests, historical sites, wilderness or
	national park and environmental settings.
•	The security of the tenure held at the time of
	reporting along with any known impediments
	to obtaininga licence to operate in the area.
Exploration done by •	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration •	Mineral Sands exploration over the areas investigated
other parties	by other parties.	by Falcon was completed by several companies:
	•	Reef Oil in 1973 defined the Gredgwin Prospect in
		the area to the south of Woolshed swamp in
		EL006864 to the north west of Farrelly Prospect
	•	Aberfoyle Resources Limited identified mineral sands
		in an area to the southwest of Terrappee Swamp in
		the late 1980’s centred on Wrights Rd.
	•	CRA drilled the area around the Farrelly Prospect on a
		coarse spacing targeting a very large WIM style
		deposit and results were not considered worthy of
		follow up.
Geology •	Deposit type, geological setting and style of	The mineralisation being explored for is either strand
	mineralisation.	deposits or WIM style within the globally significant
		MurrayBasin Perilla and Loxton sands.
Drill hole •	A summary of all information material to the •	Refer Appendices
Information	understanding of the exploration results •	All mineralisation >1%VHM is reported in the
	including a tabulation of the following	Appendices.
	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.
Data aggregation •	In reporting Exploration Results, weighting •	A length-weighted averaging technique has been
methods	averaging techniques, maximum and/or	applied where necessary to produce all displayed and
	minimum grade truncations (eg. cutting of	tabulated drill intersections. In Appendix tables and
	high grades) and cut-off grades are usually	figures, results are calculated using either a minimum
	Material and should be stated.	1%THM with higher grade zones defined by a
•	Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short	minimum 5% and 10% and max 2m internal dilution.
	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.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

20

==> picture [596 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Relationship •	These relationships are particularly important •	The relationship between mineral sands vertical
between	in the reporting of Exploration Results.	drilling and true width is considered to be close
mineralisation •	If the geometry of the mineralisation with	because these deposits are generally horizontal in
widths and	respect to the drill hole angle is known, its	nature.
intercept lengths	nature should be reported. •	Downhole lengths are reported.
•	If it is not known and only the down hole
	lengths are reported, there should be a clear
	statement to this effect (eg. ‘down hole
	length,true width not known’).
Diagrams •	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) •	The results of the AC drilling are displayed in the
	and tabulations of intercepts should be	figures in the announcement.
	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 reporting •	Where comprehensive reporting of all •	Only results above 1% VHM have been tabulated in
	Exploration Results is not practicable,	this announcement. The results are considered
	representative reporting of both low and high	representative with no intended bias.
	grades and/or widths should be practiced to
	avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
	Results.
Other substantive •	Other exploration data, if meaningful and •	Preliminary grain counting has been carried out on
exploration data	material, should be reported including (but not	selected samples deemed to be representative of the
	limited to): geological observations;	varying mineral assemblages and THM grain sizes.
	geophysical survey results; geochemical survey •	Grain counting by a 300-point modal analysis was
	results; bulk samples – size and method of	carried out by Diamantina Laboratories to
	treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk	characterise the mineral assemblage on 10
	density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock	representative samples.
	characteristics; potential deleterious or •	This modal analysis is then used to guide sachet
	contaminating substances.	scanning of the THM sinks fraction. These estimates
		of mineralogy are then used to estimate the
		percentage of VHM in each of the selected samples.
	•	Ultimately this sachet scanning will be used to guide
		the geological interpretation and selection of samples
		for morequantitative mineralogical determination.
Further work •	The nature and scale of planned further work •	Additional AC drilling is in process to define the
	(eg. tests for lateral extensions or depth	anomalous results identified in this drilling program.
	extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). •	Mineralogical analysis is ongoing.
•	Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
	possible extensions, including the main
	geological interpretations and future drilling
	areas, provided this information is not
	commerciallysensitive.

Falcon Metals Limited

ASX: FAL

21