GALILEO MINING LTD — Investor Presentation 2019

Jul 21, 2019

==> picture [119 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

22 July 2019 ASX: GAL

SIGNIFICANT DRILL TARGETS DEFINED

AT NORSEMAN COPPER PROSPECT

Corporate Directory

Directors

Non-Executive Chairman Simon Jenkins

Managing Director Brad Underwood

Technical Director Noel O’Brien

Highlights

• Extensive conductor identified beneath a high-grade copper gossan[(1)] at the Subzero Prospect

• Conductors modelled over a strike length of 2.1 kilometres as a series of blocks starting at 80 to 90 metres below surface

• Significant potential for the discovery of a copper deposit in an infrastructure rich region of Western Australia

• Reverse Circulation (RC) drilling planned for August 2019

Projects

Norseman Project Cobalt-Nickel-Copper

Fraser Range Project Nickel-Copper-Gold

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL, “Galileo” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce moving loop electro-magnetic (MLEM) surveying has delineated highly conductive targets beneath the Subzero Copper Prospect near the town of Norseman in Western Australia.

The MLEM survey was completed over an area where earlier prospecting and mapping had identified a high-grade copper gossan.

==> picture [121 x 122] intentionally omitted <==

Contact Details

T: +61 8 9463 0063 E: info@galmining.com.au W: www.galileomining.com.au

The company has recorded copper grades up to 19.9% from surface oxide breccia samples with further iron rich gossan samples assaying up to 1.1% copper.[(1)]

Galileo Mining Managing Director Brad Underwood said: “ The Subzero Prospect represents a classic drill target with a copper rich gossan on surface underlain by a conductor at depth. The magnitude of the conductor suggests the possibility of a large mineralised system and we plan to commence drill testing the area in August. Galileo is an active and well-funded mineral explorer that aims to make discoveries to create value for our shareholders. Previous explorers focussed on gold and nickel exploration around Norseman providing us with the opportunity to drill an untested copper target with potential for considerable value creation.”

The MLEM survey, which utilised 400 metre loops and a Jessy Deeps SQUID in a Slingram configuration, has identified conductors over 2.1km of strike length. Conductive rocks are frequently targeted in copper exploration as the sulphide minerals that can host copper provide an excellent response to electro-magnetic geophysical techniques.

(1) Refer to the Company’s ASX announcements dated 28th May 2019, accessible at

https://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/announcements.do?by=asxCode&asxCode=gal&timeframe=Y&year=2019

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 1 | 11

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

The Subzero conductors match the location of prospective volcanic rocks mapped in the field and are particularly noteworthy given their relationship with the copper gossan on surface. Sub-surface drill testing can now be directed towards the source of the conductors to determine the economic potential of the rocks at depth.

An initial RC drilling program is scheduled to commence in August 2019 with drill holes planned to test beneath the copper outcrop and into the top of the conductor at approximately 90 metres below surface.

Figure 1 – Subzero Prospect cross section showing geology interpreted from surface mapping, the historic prospecting shaft on surface, and the modelled EM conductor at depth. Drill holes have been designed to test beneath the high-grade copper outcrop and into the top of the EM conductor.

==> picture [407 x 478] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 2 | 11

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 – Subzero Prospect plan view of high-grade copper samples around historic workings. The position of the modelled EM conductor adjacent to the workings is shown projected to surface with the top of the model at 90 metres depth in this location.

==> picture [414 x 571] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 3 | 11

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 – Subzero geology map of prospective volcanic rock units and copper sampling. Geological interpretation is based on GSWA & Galileo field mapping and detailed magnetic surveying. The position of EM conductors projected to surface are shown as thick black lines.

==> picture [421 x 545] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 4 | 11

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Pillow basalts have been mapped to the west of the copper outcrop which is hosted in a silicified volcanic sediment. To the east a gabbro appears to have intruded the volcanic sequence. No straightforward evidence of facing direction exists with the dip of the rocks generally subvertical to the west. Cross structures have been interpreted from a recently flown detailed 50m magnetic survey and may represent zones of fluid flow.

Modelling of EM data has shown two strongly conductive zones along the prospective contact position at the Subzero Prospect. The northern model is over 1,500 metres in length with the top of the model varying between 90 and 110 metres below surface. The model dips at 88 degrees to the west, extends over 600m below surface, and has a modelled conductivity thickness of 11,000 Siemens.

The southern model is over 800 metres in length with the top of the model varying between 80 and 110 metres below surface. This model dips at 82 degrees to the west, extends over 400m below surface, and has a modelled conductivity thickness of 12,100 Siemens.

The modelled conductivities are consistent with those expected from massive sulphide sources however Volcanogenic Massive Sulphide systems can occur within conductive host rocks and additional targeting may be required to locate zones with the most potential for economic mineralisation.

The first RC drilling program will test for copper oxide mineralisation beneath the gossan and test the modelled EM conductor at a position closest to the copper rich outcrop.

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 5 | 11

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Brad Underwood, a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and a full time employee of Galileo Mining Ltd. Mr Underwood has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types 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” (JORC Code). Mr Underwood consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Investor information: phone Galileo Mining on + 61 8 9463 0063 or email info@galmining.com.au

Media: David Tasker Managing Director Chapter One Advisors E: dtasker@chapteroneadvisors.com.au T: +61 433 112 936

About Galileo Mining:

Galileo Mining Ltd (ASX: GAL) is focussed on the exploration and development of cobalt and nickel resources in Western Australia. GAL holds tenements near Norseman with over 26,000 tonnes of contained cobalt, and 122,000 tonnes of contained nickel, in JORC compliant resources (see Figure 4 below). GAL also has Joint Ventures with the Creasy Group over tenements in the Fraser Range which are highly prospective for nickelcopper-cobalt sulphide deposits.

Figure 4: JORC Mineral Resource Estimates for the Norseman Cobalt Project (“Estimates”) (refer to ASX “Prospectus” announcement dated May 25[th] 2018 and ASX announcement dated 11[th] December 2018, accessible at http://www.galileomining.com.au/investors/asx-announcements/). Galileo confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Estimates continue to apply and have not materially changed).

Cut-off Cobalt %	Class	Tonnes Mt		Co		Ni
			%	Tonnes	%	Tonnes
MT THIRSTY SILL
0.06 %	Indicated Inferred Total	10.5 2.0 12.5	0.12 0.11 0.11	12,100 2,200 14,300	0.58 0.51 0.57	60,800 10,200 71,100
MISSION SILL
0.06 %	Inferred	7.7	0.11	8,200	0.45	35,000
GOBLIN
0.06 %	Inferred	4.9	0.08	4,100	0.36	16,400
TOTAL JORC COMPLIANT RESOURCES
0.06 %	Total	25.1	0.11	26,600	0.49	122,500

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 6 | 11

==> picture [79 x 123] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [120 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 1:

Galileo Mining Ltd – Norseman Project JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. • Include reference to measures taken to 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.	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works. •GEM Geophysics Pty Ltd was contracted to complete the Moving Loop Electromagnetic (MLEM) survey. •MLEM survey data was collected with 400m loops using a Smartem V system and Jesse Deeps SQUID receiver in a 400m offset Slingram configuration. Z, X and Y component data were collected at a base frequency of 1Hz. •Maxwell software was utilised to process and model the MLEM data. •Modelling and interpretation of the EM survey geophysical data was undertaken by Spinifex Gpx Pty Ltd
Drilling techniques	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open- hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, 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 ifso, by what method, etc). _	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample 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.	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) _photography. _	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 7 | 11

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		• The total length and percentage of the relevant _intersections logged. _
	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 _grainsize of the material being sampled. _	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.
	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. _	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.
	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. _	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works.
	Location of data points	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. • Specification of the grid system used. • Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works. •All co-ordinates are in MGA94 datum, Zone 51. •Topographic control has an accuracy of 2m based on detailed satellite imagery derivedDTM.
	Data spacing and distribution	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral _Resource and Ore Reserve estimation _	•The MLEM survey at Subzero Prospect was targeting an area of outcropping copper mineralisation adjacent to volcanic rock units.

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 8 | 11

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		procedure(s) and classifications applied. • _Whether sample compositing has been applied. _
	Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is 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.	•No drilling was completed in this phase of works. •No quantitative measurements of mineralised zones/structures exist.
	Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Chain of Custody is managed by the Company’s geophysical field contractor and geophysical consultants. The data is transferred daily and is QA/QC checked by a qualified geophysicist.
	Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Continuous improvement reviews of sampling techniques and procedures are ongoing. No external audits have beenperformed.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

(Criteria listed in	the preceding section also apply to this section.)
Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title 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 obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	•The Norseman Project comprises two granted exploration licenses and eighteen granted prospecting licenses covering 278km2, and one Mining Lease Application covering 6.54 km2 •All tenements within the Norseman Project are 100% owned by Galileo Mining Ltd. •The Norseman Project is centred around a location approximately 10km north-west of Norseman on vacant crown land. •All tenements in the Norseman Cobalt Project are 100% covered by the Ngadju Native Title Determined Claim. •The tenements are in good standing and there arenoknown impediments.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•Barrier Exploration completed three diamond drill holes at the Cowan West VMS prospect in 1971 •The GSWA 250k Norseman Map Sheet Explanatory Notes records that 13 metric tonnes of ore were produced from the pits and shaft at the Subzero prospect in 1953. Average ore grade was 8.36% copper.

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 9 | 11

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•The target geology and mineralisation style is volcanic hosted massive sulphide (VHMS) mineralisation occurring within the GSWA mapped Mount Kirk Formation •The Mount Kirk formation is described as “Acid and basic volcanic rocks and sedimentary rocks, intruded by basic and ultrabasic rocks”
	Drill hole Information	• A summary of all information material to the 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. _	•No drilling reported
	Data aggregation methods	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • 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. _	•No assays reported
	Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be 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’). _	•No drilling completed •The mineralisation occurs on surface with a general strike of 010° similar to the host rock •Geometry from surface outcrop is best described as sub-vertical however no reliable quantitative measurements exist.
	Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and 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.	•Plan map of the general prospect area and detailed location plan map with high grade samples has been included along with accurate hand-held GPS sample locations (Garmin GPS 78s) +/- 5m in X/Y/Z dimensions.

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 10 | 11

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Balanced reporting	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration _Results. _	•All significant results are reported.
	Other substantive exploration data	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	•Detailed 50m line spaced aeromagnetic data has been used for interpretation of underlying geology. Data was collected by Magspec Airborne Surveys Pty Ltd using a Geometrics G-823 caesium vapor magnetometer at an average flying height of 30m.
	Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not _commercially sensitive. _	•Drilling will be undertaken using MLEM results, rock chip samples, and mapping to target potentially economic mineralisation

==> picture [595 x 25] intentionally omitted <==

Page 11 | 11