GATEWAY MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2024

Dec 17, 2024

ASX Announcement ASX: GML

18[th] December 2024

GATEWAY IDENTIFIES MULTIPLE PRIORITY TARGETS AT THE BARRELMAKER GOLD PROJECT, WA

Successful targeting process confirms Barrelmaker as a significant exploration opportunity for Gateway in 2025

HIGHLIGHTS

• Barrelmaker Gold Project in the Sandstone region of WA confirmed as a highly prospective early stage exploration opportunity.

• At least 12 targets identified from within the historical drilling database that require additional testing.

• Major, largely untested structural corridors to be targeted with systematic programs of geochemical sampling and/or geophysical surveys.

• Endowed, large-scale project in area of active M&A activity.

• Detailed exploration work programs are now being planned with targeted commencement in early 2025.

• Gateway moves into 2025 in a strong financial position to execute its growth strategy.

Gateway Mining Limited (ASX: GML) ( Gateway or Company ) is pleased to report the outcomes of a recently completed data review and exploration targeting process undertaken across its highly prospective Barrelmaker Gold Project (Figure 1).

The Barrelmaker Gold Project is located in the Sandstone region of Western Australia. The project, covering an area of 488km[2] , represents a large-scale exploration opportunity with demonstrated gold endowment, encompassing more than 80km of prospective strike extent within the Gum Creek Greenstone Belt.

While the project has been subjected to historical exploration, previous drilling is considered to have been sub-optimal to test the mineralisation and the historical results have only now been fully compiled.

Gateway’s planned upcoming work programs at the Barrelmaker Project include in-fill airborne magnetics surveys, field checking and geochemical sampling as well as a planned program of air-core drilling commencing in early 2025.

Management Comment

Gateway Executive Chairman, Peter Langworthy, said: “We see the Barrelmaker Gold Project as an area that has all the hallmarks of being a well-endowed gold system. It covers a large area that hosts a system of what we believe are important structural controls within the greenstone belt, it clearly has demonstrated gold endowment based on the targets and results we have now outlined, and it has only really seen cursory programs of exploration in the past.

Gateway Mining Ltd

LinkedIn: @gateway-mining Twitter: @gateway_mining www.gatewaymining.com.au

B1/431 Roberts Road Subiaco WA 6008

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

We know that the Gum Creek Greenstone Belt is a highly productive area with a multi-million ounce pedigree, and we see outstanding potential to continue to add to that across our Barrelmaker Gold Project. We are also very conscious that the Sandstone region is in the process of consolidation and is a much sort after mining district.

Moving into 2025, we are looking forward starting the New Year with well-planned programs of systematic exploration across the key target areas to put us in the best possible position to unlock the potential of this asset for our shareholders.”

Target Summary

The targeting process utilising the historical drilling database has identified at least 12 targets that require additional programs of exploration. In addition, a number of large-scale structural corridors have been identified that require generative programs of systematic geochemical sampling and/or geophysics. The following is a summary of each target (see Appendix (1) and Appendix (2) for additional detail):

==> picture [193 x 166] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [180 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

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

Figure (1): Gateway Mining Limited Sandstone
Projects Location Plan
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [222 x 400] intentionally omitted <==

Figure (2): Barrelmaker Gold Project – Geology and Prospect Locations

Blacksmith Prospect

The Blacksmith Prospect is characterised by a large-scale soil geochemical and laterite anomaly (600m x 400m at a 200ppb Au cut-off). Follow-up drilling has demonstrated widespread gold anomalism but had limited effectiveness due to a depletion zone to approximately 40m.

2

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Significant historic intersections include:

WRC004 13 metres @ 1.4g/t Au from 41m GRB723 20 metres @ 1.8g/t Au from 35m (end of hole)

The mineralisation is untested at depth and is not constrained in any direction.

Kauri Prospect

The Kauri Prospect is located immediately south of Blacksmith and is likely part of the same gold mineralised system. Surface geochemical sampling and RAB drilling has identified gold anomalism over a strike length of approximately 1.2km. Structural controls have not yet been fully defined.

Highly encouraging is a series of bottom-of-hole intersections that remain untested. Results include:

3720/1548 4 metres @ 1.3g/t Au from 16m (end of hole) 3840/1656 4 metres @ 2.5g/t Au from 36m (end of hole)

Kauri South Prospect

The Kauri South Prospect is focused on a series of historical prospector shafts and adjacent modern day scraping operations (excised tenement). Limited wide spaced RAB and RC drilling has intersected a series of anomalous structural zones that remain totally unconstrained.

Significant drill results include:

3660/1472 11 metres @ 4.5g/t Au from 58m 3660/1480 12 metres @ 1.6g/t Au from 21m 3660/1488 9 metres @ 2.0g/t Au from 21m

Transit-Encino Prospect

Mineralisation is hosted in a sequence of mafic volcanic rocks in what is interpreted to be a WNW trending shear zone. Shallow RAB drilling has identified widespread anomalism over a least 1km (remains open).

Significant drill results returned from both RAB and RC drilling include:

GRB660 22 metres @ 2.3g/t Au from 61m (end of hole) ENRC006 11 metres @ 1.2g/t Au from 53m GRB699 10 metres @ 3.2g/t Au from 65m

Maple Prospect

The Maple Prospect is located on the western margin of the project and is hosted by a sequence of interbedded banded iron formations (BIF’s) and mafic volcanic rocks. Maple is interpreted to be the northern extension of a larger target (as yet untested) that is based on the BIF dominated succession being “dragged” into the regionally significant Youno Fault.

Reconnaissance RC drilling testing a zone of soil anomalism returned:

MARC004 3 metres @ 2.4g/t Au from 61m MARC001 2 metres @ 1.0g/t Au from 54m

This zone of mineralisation is currently defined by limited drilling over 100m and remains open along strike and at depth.

Crater Prospect

The Crater Prospect is located on what is interpreted to be the southern extension of the Gidgie shear zone. Limited RAB drilling has intersected highly anomalous gold mineralisation on a contact between basalt, dolerite and ultramafic.

The significant intersections were returned from the deepest holes suggesting that a zone of depletion is present, and that the mineralisation remains totally unconstrained at depth.

3

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Significant drill results include:

GRB619 15 metres @ 1.9g/t Au from 48m (end of hole) GRB1069 5 metres @ 1.3g/t Au from 35m and 8 metres @ 1.3g/t Au from 55m (end of hole)

Seagull Prospect

The Seagull Prospect is defined by a widespread (>1000m) anomalism defined in RAB drilling. Subsequent RC drilling intersected gold mineralised structures in fresh rock. The mineralisation, which is hosted in a sequence of sediments, remains untested at depth and along strike.

Significant drill results include:

3610/2280 9 metres @ 2.0g/t Au from 9m SGRC010 4 metres @ 1.0g/t Au from 70m

Woodley Ridge Prospect

The Woodley Ridge Prospect is located across a sequence of BIF, interbedded ultramafics and mafic volcanic rocks. Gold mineralisation has been intersected in two areas spaced ~3km apart.

Significant drill results include:

SRC049 5 metres @ 1.4g/t Au from 0m SRC007 5 metres @ 3.2g/t Au from 54m SRC025 5 metres @ 1.3g/t Au from 109m

Grace Darling Prospect

The Grace Darling Prospect is defined by a soil geochemical anomaly and a series of historical shafts and pits over a strike length of 1.7km. This prospect area itself also lies within a ~14km trend of historical workings and is interpreted as the southern extension of the Gidgie shear zone.

The anomalism is located along a contact between sheared mafic and granitic rocks. There has been no drilling on this target.

Transit Gravity Feature

A distinct gravity high, magnetic low with an estimated 600m diameter has been identified to the immediate south of the Transit Prospect within an interpreted NE trending structural corridor. The feature is interpreted to be a discrete intrusion. There has been no drilling or surface sampling over the target area, and it appears to be located under shallow cover.

Bo Peep Prospect

The Bo Peep Prospect is a distinct granitic intrusion in the core of a doubly plunging antiform. Wide spaced RAB drilling (1km sections) to test under transported cover returned low-level, but significant drilling results (best result 4180/1825: 3m @ 1.3g/t Au).

Given that the Montague granodiorite, located to the west, has a gold endowment of approximately 800,000oz, the Bo Peep Prospect presents as a significant target.

Northern Dancer Prospect

The Northern Dancer Prospect is centred on a series of old workings across a sequence of mafic volcanic rocks that were tested by limited, wide spaced RAB drilling. The drilling returned extensive low level gold and alteration.

Of most interest is a bottom-of-hole intersection of 6m @ 0.83g/t Au (WTR227) that remains completely untested.

Youno Fault

The Youno Fault is a major NE-SW trending structural system that extends over at least 20km within the Barrelmaker Project area. The interpreted intersection of the Youno Fault with the Gidgie shear one is marked by the multi-million ounce Swan-Swift Gold System (Horizon Gold Limited).

The fault has not had any systematic programs of exploration and is largely under transported cover.

4

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Barrelmaker Gold Project Work Programs

Programs of exploration will commence in early 2025 (subject to weather events) and will include:

• Detailed field assessment of each target, with a particular focus on understanding structural controls.

• Programs of soil sampling. The priority area will be across the Youno Fault.

• Infill airborne magnetic surveying to provide full coverage of high-quality, detailed data.

• Programs of aircore drilling.

Montague Range Base Metals Project Update

The assay results have now been returned from the recently completed rock chip sampling program (n=252) across the Apex Copper-Nickel-PGE Prospect . The data is currently being fully integrated to help determine the metal fertility of the intrusion.

Follow-up field programs will assess anomalous results in further detail.

A number of samples have reported significantly elevated values (see Appendix (1) and Appendix (2) for additional detail):

Sample No	Easting	Northing	Copper (ppm)	Nickel (ppm)	Cobalt (ppm)	Palladium (ppb)	Platinum (ppb)
MRRK006	753,608	6,975,380	2467	1342	127	1355	7.7
MRRK009	750,162	6,980,224	1095	5329	619	878	81

Notes:

• All coordinates located in MGA (GDA94) Zone 50. • Rock chip samples

Planning of next stage exploration for the highly prospective Flametree Cu-Ni-PGE Prospect is underway.

Premier 1 Lithium Withdrawal from Montague Lithium Farm-In Agreement

The Company also advises that Premier 1 Lithium Limited (ASX:PLC) ( PLC ) has withdrawn from the Montague Lithium Farm-In Agreement established in January 2023 (see ASX announcement dated 23 January 2023) ( Agreement ). Under the Agreement PLC had the ability to earn up to an 80% interest in the lithium rights over selected tenements within the Company’s Montague Project.

PLC decided to withdraw from the Agreement at the end of the non-withdrawal period. PLC has not earned any lithium interest in the tenements and Gateway will retain the lithium rights along with all other non-gold rights across these tenements.

This release has been authorised by:

Peter Langworthy Executive Chair

For and on behalf of GATEWAY MINING LIMITED

Investors Media Peter Langworthy Nicholas Read Executive Chair Read Corporate T: 08 6383 9969 T: 08 9388 1474 or Kar Chua Company Secretary T: 02 8316 3998

Click here to subscribe to investor updates

5

Follow us on: LinkedIn: @gateway-mining Twitter: @gateway_mining

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled or reviewed by Mr Peter Langworthy, Executive Chairman of Gateway Mining Limited and who is a current Member of the AUSIMM. Mr Langworthy has sufficient experience, which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposit under consideration and to the activities undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code of Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr Langworthy consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on the 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-Looking Statements). Forward-Looking 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.

Persons reading this announcement are cautioned that such statements are only predictions, and that actual future results or performance may be materially different. 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.

No representation or warranty, express or implied, is made by Gateway that any Forward-Looking Statement will be achieved or proved to be correct. Further, Gateway disclaims any intent or obligation to update or revise any Forward-Looking Statement whether as a result of new information, estimates or options, future events or results or otherwise, unless required to do so by law.

6

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX (1): SIGNIFICANT INTERCEPT TABLES

TABLE (1): BARRELMAKER HISTORIC DRILLING SIGNIFICANT INTERCEPT TABLE

Prospect	Hole ID	Hole Type	MGA_E	MGA_N	RL	Hole Depth (m)	Dip/Azi	From (m)	To (m)	Width (m)	Au (g/t)	Company
Blacksmith	WRC04	RC	734742	6972751	533	208	-60/000	41	54	13	1.4	Gateway
								98	99	1	1.2	Gateway
Blacksmith	GRB723	RAB	734842	6972752	533	55	-60/000	35	55	20	1.8	Gateway
Bo Peep	4180/1825	RAB	737046	6975242	520	20	-90/000	8	11	3	1.3	Cyprus
Crater	GRB1069	RAB	741432	6958222	506	63	-60/000	35	40	5	1.3	Gateway
								55	63	8	1.3
Crater	GRB619	RAB	741402	6958227	516	63	-60/90	48	63	15	1.9	Gateway
Encino	ENRC006	RC	731647	6970750	556	99	-60/090	53	64	11	1.2	Cyprus
Encino	GRB660	RAB	731957	6970402	560	83	-60/090	61	83	22	2.3	Gateway
Encino	GRB699	RAB	731942	6970344	552	80	-60/090	65	75	10	3.2	Gateway
Kauri	3720/1548	RAB	734166	6970722	547	20	-90/000	16	20	4	1.3	Cyprus
Kauri	3760/1624	RAB	734936	6971113	539	20	-90/000	16	20	4	2.5	Cyprus
Kauri	3840/1656	RAB	735261	6971910	535	40	-90/000	36	40	4	2.5	Arimco
Kauri	3880/1624	RAB	734946	6972314	533	10	-90/000	4	8	4	1.1	Cyprus
Kauri	KARC005	RC	734908	6972515	532	60	-60/090	2	4	2	1.2	Cyprus
Kauri South	3660/1472	RAB	733398	6970131	562	69	-90/000	58	69	11	4.5	Arimco
Kauri South	3660/1488	RAB	733558	6970129	553	40	-90/000	21	30	9	2	Arimco
Kauri South	3660/1480	RAB	733478	6970130	556	40	-60/000	21	33	12	1.6	Árimco
Maple	MARC004	RC	730000	6972174	550	99	-60/090	61	64	3	2.4	Cyprus
Maple	MARC001	RC	729979	6972074	550	99	-60/090	54	56	2	1.0	Cyprus
								68	69	1	1.7
Northern Dancer	WTR0227	RC	739362	6965074	524	38	-60/245	33	36	6	0.83	BMA
Seagull	3610/2280	RAB	741476	6969533	513	41	-90/000	9	24	9	2.0	Arimco
Seagull	SGRC10	RC	741473	6969438	513	95	-60/270	70	74	4	1.0	Arimco
Woodley	SRC049	RC	739258	6940804	538	134	-60/261	0	5	5	1.4	Western Minerals
Woodley	SRC007	RC	739725	6938549	531	100	-60/261	54	59	5	3.2	Western Minerals
Woodley	SRC025	RC	739620	6938431	527	128	-60/261	109	114	5	1.3	Western Minerals

Notes:

• All coordinates located in MGA (GDA94) Zone 50. Azimuth is magnetic degrees

• Samples are various split and composite samples

• Significant intersections are calculated based on a minimum of 1m greater than 1.0g/t Au with a 0.2g/t cut off and maximum of 3m of internal dilution

• NA – Not Assayed

• NSA – No Significant Assay

7

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

TABLE (2): MONTAGUE RANGE SIGNIFICANT ROCK CHIP RESULTS

SAMPLE	Easting	Northing	Co_p pm	Cr_pp m	Cs_pp m	Cu_p pm	MgO_pc t	Ni_ppm	Pd_ppb	Pt_ppb
MRRK006	753,608	6,975,380	127.6	42	0.1	2467.3	0.15	1342.3	1355.8	7.7
MRRK009	750,162	6,980,224	619.1	446	0.15	1094.9	0.17	5329.3	877.7	81.2
MRRK042	750,321	6,981,003	23.4	99	1.17	581.7	1.40	99.3	16.2	24.1
MRRK020	751,140	6,975,199	68.5	106	0.24	472.4	0.30	103.8	3.9	4.2
MRRK175	751,617	6,978,097	55	2019	0.07	243.9	14.84	374.2	78.3	307.7
MRRK158	752,255	6,977,043	55	1705	0.16	206.1	15.23	411.7	64.7	322.4
MRRK012	751,294	6,979,145	66.8	1694	0.19	139.7	16.04	411.2	25.5	301.7
MRRK031	752,394	6,976,808	61.2	1692	0.08	123.4	15.93	422	53.5	324.7
MRRK036	751,630	6,977,967	58.6	1431	0.09	107.8	16.55	327.4	73.3	411.1
MRRK063	754,236	6,974,331	53.4	1099	0.32	68.7	12.87	250.4	40.3	233.3
MRRK231	750,736	6,980,316	148.3	1665	0.08	35.1	27.84	1582.1	10.8	10.9
MRRK093	753,323	6,975,297	120.3	5234	0.09	26.8	26.04	1447.8	4.2	3.9
MRRK015	750,600	6,979,898	123.1	6415	0.13	19.7	31.36	1849.7	3.8	20.4
MRRK198	751,208	6,978,791	129.2	7369	0.11	18.7	22.18	1546.4	8	18.7
MRRK218	750,604	6,979,844	124.7	6602	0.09	15	29.41	1911	7.3	25.9
MRRK061	754,043	6,974,268	120.2	1591	0.13	15	28.51	1737.6	2.7	1.7
MRRK209	750,761	6,979,060	143.1	7305	0.16	14.1	27.32	2131.2	3.6	3.8
MRRK233	750,526	6,980,251	135.2	6701	0.13	10.4	27.88	2071.7	2.4	6.4
MRRK164	751,654	6,977,260	169.2	7337	0.11	9	24.18	1905.6	3.3	4.8
MRRK079	753,512	6,974,948	147.8	1616	0.15	8.9	27.81	1766.9	3.1	3.6
MRRK224	751,015	6,979,588	147.6	7178	0.1	8.6	29.37	2277.6	3.8	10.6
MRRK216	750,890	6,979,939	102.9	6286	0.09	4.6	30.17	2054.5	4.6	8.3
MRRK186	751,158	6,978,372	105.5	5615	0.09	3.6	28.40	1738.9	2.6	8.2

Notes:

• All coordinates located in MGA (GDA94) Zone 50.

8

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX (2): BARRELMAKER DRILLING 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 (e.g. 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 (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverized 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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	• Gateway RC drilling (GRC prefix) - 2kg - 3kg samples were split from dry 1m bulk samples. • Historic Gateway RAB drilling (GRB – prefix) - submitted samples comprised 2kg speared parent samples which were subjected to total preparation. Au by B/ETA to 1ppb. Ag, As Co, Cu, Ni Sb and Zn by B/AAS to 1ppm. Non-Gateway Historical Drilling: • RC Drilling: Samples were collected on 1m intervals, riffle split and 1m samples prepared for assay. • Samples were sent various commercial laboratories for gold by either aqua regia digest and AAS determination, or fire assay on 50g charge. • RAB Drilling: Samples were collected on variable intervals, mostly 3 and 4m via scoop/spear and composite samples prepared for assay. • Samples were sent various commercial laboratories for gold by aqua regia digest and AAS determination_._ • Rock chips were taken on a grid perpendicular to strike at 400m line spacing and 100m sample intervals. Only whole fresh rock samples were taken from outcrop. For areas of regolith no samples were taken at the geologist’s discretion. Samples were placed in numbered calico bags. Samples were approximately 1kg to ensure representativity. • Rock chip samples were taken across the strike length and width of the Montague Range intrusions to ensure representivity by experienced geologists. • All rock chips were submitted to Intertek, Perth for 4A/MS48 and FA50/MS analysis. • Handheld XRF instruments (Olympus) were utilized on site for rock and mineral identification aid at the geologist’s discretion. Prior to use, and at regular intervals throughout the day, the handheld XRF instrument was calibrated, and a CRM analysed to ensure the instrument window was not contaminated with dust and the instrument was analysing correctly. Handheld XRF data was used as an aid only.

9

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drilling techniques	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. 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.).	• RC Drilling: RC percussion drilled. No details available on drilling rig specifications. • Gateway RAB Drilling: Drilled to blade refusal. Non Gateway RAB were typically drilled to set depths. Cyprus to 20m and Arimco to 40m. No details available ondrillingrig specifications.
Drill sample recovery	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximize 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.	• RC Drilling: There are no records available that capture information on drilling recoveries. Typically a minimum 3kg sample was provided to the laboratory for assay. Samples are considered fit for purpose.
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. • The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.	• RC, Aircore and RAB chips were washed and chips were visually inspected and logged to record lithology, weathering, alteration, mineralisation, veining and structure. • Logging is considered both qualitative and quantitative or semi-quantitative in nature. • The logging information is considered to be fit for purpose.
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.	• RC samples were split using a riffle and/or cone splitter. 1m samples were collected and prepared for assay. Re-assays were undertaken on selected 1m samples. • RAB samples were taken on various composite intervals, nominally 3m (Arimco) and 4m (Cyprus) via scoop or spear collection methods. • Typically 3kg samples were submitted to the assay laboratory. • Only minor numbers of samples are recorded as being wet. • QA/QC data is not currently available. • Sampling processes are considered fit for purpose. • Samples were analysed at various commercial laboratories via either aqua regia or fire assay digest and determination for Au by AAS technique. Some various multi-element data exist.

10

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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 (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• All samples were assayed at various commercial laboratories in Perth. • Samples were analysed at various commercial laboratories via either aqua regia or fire assay digest and determination for Au by AAS technique. Some various multi-element data exist. • QA/QC data is not currently available. • Sampling processes are considered fit for purpose.
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.	• All drilling information is currently stored in a Gateway SQL database. • All information has been plotted on section and in plan to match against neighbouring holes and determine likely validity of the data. • QA/QC data is not currently available. • Sampling and assay data are considered fit for purpose.
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.	• Data have been transformed from various historical local grids and survey pick- ups in AMG84 zone 50 into MGA 94 zone 50. • RC Downhole surveys are a mixture of single shot and multi shot camera readings and have been visually validated on sections but largely taken at face value. • RAB hole orientations are assumed to be nominal. • Location data is considered fit for purpose. • Topographic control has been verified by DTM generated by regional gravity and aeromagnetic surveys.
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 procedure(s) and classifications applied. • Whether sample compositing has been applied.	• Historical drilling has been undertaken on a variety of grid spacings and drill directions. While these data re suitable for highlighting existing anomalism and exploration targets, none are considered sufficient to establish the degree of geological or grade continuity for any Mineral Resource estimation. • Sample compositing has been used for RAB and some RC drilling.
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	• The majority of holes have been drilled at a 60-90° dip and intersected the mineralisation at an appropriate angle. • In some cases, reverse angled holes have been completed to test for short range controls on thegold mineralisation.

11

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	• The orientation of existing drilling is only useful at this stage for providing exploration targets for further investigation and follow up.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• No information available.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	• Historic data has been audited through review of associated reports and visual inspections on variousplans and sections.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (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.	• E57/1057 and E57/1067 are 100% Gateway Mining Ltd (GML) granted on 17th July 2017 and 18thSeptember respectively. • E51/1039 and E57/1040 were owned 100% by Golden Mile Resources Ltd (G88). The tenements were granted on the 19th July and 17th July 2017, respectively. Gateway Mining Ltd (GML) has entered into a farm-in and JV agreement with G88 whereby GML can earn 80% interest in the tenements by spending a total of $1.13M over 5 years on exploration through to a Decision to Mine. G88 then has the option to either contribute to the JV or dilute to a 0.5% NSR. Gateway has satisfied conditions to earn in a current interest of 51% . • A pre-existing 1% NSR exists on the tenements (E57/1039 & E57/1040), payable to Bruce Robert Legendre, Nemex Pty Ltd and Ross Frederick Crew (jointly). • NoNativeTitle claims arelodged overthe tenements.
Exploration done by other parties	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	• Gold was discovered in the district during the gold rush era, first records of gold won from small-scale, high-grade workings include the Montague Mining Centre (1904-13). Renewed interest in the late 1960's included base metal exploration carried out within exposed stratigraphy of the Montague Ranges (Bungarra Ranges), exploration interest that broadened with the release of the Sandstone 1:250,000 aeromagnetic sheet in 1970 resulting in the staking of favourable magnetic anomalies by exploration companies. • Modern exploration within the tenements has been undertaken by several operators: o Cyprus Minerals Australia (1986–1989):Explored the area in conjunction with discovery and development of the Gidgee Gold

12

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		o o o o o o o o o o o o o	Camp. Cyprus conducted geological mapping, soil sampling, rock chip sampling, RAB and RC drilling. Arimco Mining (1990-1991):Continued exploration by exploring structural targets, namely Kauri and Encino. Arimco conducted soil sampling and RAB drilling of these targets. Pancontinental Gold (1993):Completed geological mapping, aeromagnetic interpretation and laterite sampling. Troy Resources and Battle Mountain (1994):Conducted stream sediment sampling, rock chip sampling, vacuum drilling and RAB drilling over the Northern Dancer prospect. J.P. Legendre (1994–1995):Conducted a historic data review, and soil sampling. Tulloch Resources (1995–1996):Limited to desktop reviews of historic data and follow-up field inspections Goldfields Exploration (1995):Conducted RAB drilling on the Wyooda Thangoo tenement. Gateway Mining Ltd (1996–2006):Conducted laterite sampling and RAB drilling near the Barrelmaker prospect. Arimco Mining (1998–1999):Conducted RAB and RC drilling at the Kauri prospect. Abelle (2001–2002):Conducted aeromagnetic survey, and followed up with soil sampling and RAB drilling Australian Gold Resources (2001–2002):Desktop data review including of all geophysical data. WCP Resources Ltd (2006):Conducted RC drilling at the Legendre prospect Legend Mining (2006–2010):Conducted VTEM airborne geophysics, ground loop EM, aircore and RC drilling at the Cpbra and Sidewinder Ni targets Fortis Mining (2011–2014): Conducted an aeromagnetic survey and limited auger sampling over the Barrel Maker prospect.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• Gateway’s Barrelmaker Project is located in the Gidgee district in the Archean Yilgarn Craton of Western Australia approximately 630km NE of Perth and 70km north from the township of Sandstone on the eastern central portion of the Gum Creek Greenstone Belt, of the Southern Cross Province. Metamorphic grade of the Gum Creek Greenstone Belt is estimated to be low- grade greenschist facies. • Project lithology includes basalt/ash tuff/dolerite/gabbro, the Montague Granodiorite sub-volcanic intrusion (calc-alkaline - FI), dacite volcanic flow/s (FI), volcaniclastic sequences of felsic composition and epiclastic conglomerates, ultramafic intrusives and external orogenic granite plutons. Keyregionalcharacteristics ofaVolcanicArcExtensional Basin include calc-

13

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		alkaline bimodal volcanic sequences associated with extensive iron formations. Later ENE-WSW orogenic compression event is characterised by NNW regional scale faults/unconformities, NNW shearing and folding, slaty cleavage has developed within sediments near a tight syncline fold closure within the NE area of theproject.
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.	• Exploration drill results from historic drilling, and associated details are contained in Table 1 of this release. These results are taken on face value, and will be either followed up or verified by Gateways planned exploration activities.
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.	• Significant intersections are calculated as a minimum of 1m greater than 1.0g/t with a lower cutoff of 0.2g/t u Au with a maximum of 3m of internal dilution • No high-grade cut-off has been applied.
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’).	• Historic data only is presented at this stage. Gateway has not conducted any of its own investigations, so the relationships between intercept widths and mineralisation true widths is not known at this stage. However, several RAB holes by Arimco are whole-hole composites, so would overstate the true width of mineralisation.
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.	• Appropriate maps are included in the announcement.
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.	• The accompanying document is considered to be a balanced report with a suitable cautionary note.
Other substantive	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey	• Significant other historic data exists including soil sampling, geophysical surveying and interpretation, but are not considered material at this stage.

14

==> picture [76 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
exploration data	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. _
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.	• Gateway intends to conduct orientation sampling and drilling programmes, to be followed up with aircore drilling of targets generated from both historic data as well as revised geological interpretation.

15