GATEWAY MINING LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2026

Jan 21, 2026

==> picture [147 x 89] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Announcement ASX: GML

22 January 2026

NEW GOLD DISCOVERY AT HAFLINGER

DRILLING INTERSECTS 52m @ 1.4g/t Au , INCLUDING 12m @ 3.1g/t Au

HIGHLIGHTS

• Drilling on the Celia shear structure at the Haflinger gold target within the Yandal Gold Project in WA has yielded a significant new discovery:

• 52m @ 1.4g/t Au from 64m, including 12m @ 3.1g/t Au (MPAC262)

• This hole was drilled south of the two bottom-of-hole results reported earlier this week, both of which ‘clipped’ the targeted mafic-intermediate contact structure:[1]

• 2m @ 3.4g/t Au from 148m to BOH, within a broader 6m @ 1.4g/t Au from 144m (MPAC187) – MPAC262 is 500m south of this hole.

• 4m @ 2.9g/t Au from 148m within a broader 16m @ 1.0g/t Au from 136m (MPAC231) – MPAC262 is 200m south of this hole.

• The mineralisation occurs in a highly favourable structural setting, where the mafic-intermediate contact flexures to the south-east, creating a region of intense deformation (see Figure 1).

• These three holes now define the mineralised Haflinger trend over a minimum ~500m, with the geology becoming more favourable as drilling moves southwards towards the structural flexure.

• Gateway remains well capitalised to undertake planned 2026 exploration, having approximately $13.1m (cash and liquid ASX securities) at the end of the September quarter, as well as having completed an additional $22.5m capital raising post September quarter.

Introduction

Gateway Mining Limited (ASX: GML) ( Gateway or Company ) is pleased to advise that it has discovered a significant new zone of gold mineralisation from recent aircore drilling at the Haflinger gold target, within its 100%-owned Yandal Gold Project in Western Australia.

Management Comment

Gateway’s Executive Chairman, Mr Andrew Bray, said: The result in MPAC262 of 52m @ 1.4g/t Au, including 12m @ 3.1g/t Au, is an outstanding new discovery from the aircore drilling. Most importantly, this isn’t an isolated result – it builds substantially on the two BOH results we released earlier in the week, both of which returned high-grade gold within the key mafic-intermediate contact structure.

The 2m @ 3.4g/t Au in MPAC187[1] was intersected in fresh rock in the final two metres of the hole before blade refusal. That result is 500m to the north of today’s result. MPAC231, which sits in between those two holes, also ‘clipped’ the key structure, returning 4m @ 2.9g/t Au from 148m in fresh rock (within a broader zone of 16m @ 1.0g/t Au)[1] . With today’s result, the structure has now been intersected over a strike length spanning ~500m and it remains open to the south.

Excitingly, the geology becomes more favourable as we move southwards. This gold mineralisation is located in a highly promising geological setting where the mafic-intermediate contact flexures to the south-east, creating significant complexity and a favourable location for gold deposition due to enhanced fluid flow and trapping mechanisms at the ‘bend’. The next several lines of aircore drilling will drill closer to (and through) this flexure.

Haflinger is clearly shaping up as a very promising high-grade gold structure. Aircore drilling will commence very shortly with two rigs on site. One rig will have the sole focus of increasing drill density around this trend, while the second rig will continue systematically following the eastern Mustang shear southwards. The Company will then undertake follow-up RC drilling.”

1Refer to ASX announcement dated 19 January 2026.

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

Yandal Gold Project

Drilling along the Celia Shear structure has yielded a new gold discovery at Haflinger:

• MPAC262: 52m @ 1.4g/t Au, including 12m @ 3.1g/t Au from 64m

Mineralisation at Haflinger is located along the contact between mafic and intermediate lithologies within the Celia Shear Zone (see Figure 2). Southward, the sheared contact flexures eastward resulting in a series of dilationary structures that have allowed for localised enhanced fluid flow. Interpretation of magnetic imagery shows that the flexure zone that hosts Haflinger continues southward for a least a further 400m, with the next several lines of drilling planned to intersect this structural zone.

==> picture [452 x 359] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Topographic map highlighting aircore intercepts (Au ppm) received to date, in relation to major shear zones and planned drilling across the Mustang-Pony Trend.

Historical rotary airblast drilling across the Haflinger Prospect largely failed to penetrate transported cover and the zone of depletion, rendering previous exploration efforts ineffective at testing the mineralised structures (see Figure 2).

Along strike 200m to the south of drillhole MPAC0262, major northeast-trending brittle structures intersect the target shear zone. As seen elsewhere across the Yandal Project, the intersection of such NE-structures with a mineralised shear zone results in an increased depth of weathering and enhanced supergene enrichment (i.e. thicker oxide mineralisation).

The Company is expecting this area to have the most impressive mineralisation within the target area.

2

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

Aircore drilling by Gateway has been far more effective at penetrating into fresh rock and has successfully defined primary mineralisation, hosted within the mafic-intermediate contact, over a minimum strike length of 500m. Aircore drilling results at Haflinger announced previously by the Company highlight the underlying sheared contact as a high-grade target:[2]

• MPAC187: 2m @ 3.4g/t Au from 148m to BOH, within a broader 6m @ 1.4g/t Au from 144m

• MPAC231: 4m @ 2.9g/t Au from 148m within a broader 16m @ 1.0g/t Au from 136m

MPAC262 is located 500m south of MPAC187 and 200m south of MPAC231, showing consistent ~3.0g/t mineralisation over a minimum strike of 500m.

Drill results are pending for completed aircore hole MPAC263. This hole was drilled stepping back from MPAC262 and ended within the highly-sheared target structure. Assay results, once received, will be released to the market in due course.

==> picture [377 x 234] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Cross Section A extensive supergene mineralisation above the target sheared maficintermediate contact.

Upcoming Drilling

Aircore drilling will recommence in the coming days with two rigs on site. The first rig will solely focus on infill drilling along the Haflinger trend. The increased drill density is expected to accurately delineate the key mafic-intermediate contact shear zone. These targets will then be followed up by RC drilling.

The second rig will drill systematically southwards along the Mustang Shear, with the aim of approximately mapping the mafic-intermediate contact. Follow-up, closer spaced aircore is expected to then accurately define the key contact zone in preparation for subsequent RC drilling.

2Refer to ASX announcement dated 19 January 2026.

3

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

==> picture [333 x 470] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: GML Yandal Project area in relation to known gold mines, road infrastructure and regional greenstone terrains (light green).

This release has been authorised by:

Andrew Bray Executive Chairman

Investors Andrew Bray Executive Chairman T: 08 6383 9969

Media Nicholas Read Read Corporate T: 08 9388 1474

or

Kar Chua Company Secretary T: 02 8316 3998

4

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

Click here to subscribe to investor updates

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

Competent Person Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled or reviewed by Mr Richard Pugh who is Gateway Mining Limited’s Chief Executive Officer and is a current Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists (AIG). Mr Pugh 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 Pugh consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this announcement that relates to Mineral Resources has been extracted from various Gateway ASX announcements and are available to view on the Company’s website at www.gatewaymining.com.au or through the ASX website at www.asx.com.au (using ticker code “GML”)

The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Mineral Resources in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcement.

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.

5

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX A: AC Table of Significant Gold Intercepts

												Intercept
		Hole Details
Hole ID
		Coordinates (MGA94 Zone 51)
	Easting (m)	Northing (m)	RL (m)	Dip (°)	Azimuth (°)	Max Depth (m)	Hole Type	From (m)	To (m)	Interval (m)	Grade (Au g/t)	Interval
MPAC0260	270397	7134803	545	-60	250	115	AC	84	88	4	0.2	4 metres @ 0.2g/t Au from 84 metres
MPAC0261	270449	7134817	545	-60	250	117	AC	76	88	12	0.4	12 metres @ 0.4g/t Au from 76 metres
								112	117	5	0.3	5 metres @ 0.3g/t Au from 112 metres
MPAC0262	270495	7134833	545	-60	250	127	AC	64	116	52	1.4	52 metres @ 1.4g/t Au from 64 metres (incl. 12 metres @ 3.1g/t Au)
MPAC0187*	270332	7135305	545	-60	250	150	AC	84	88	4	0.1	4 metres @ 0.1g/t Au from 84 metres
								128	132	4	0.1	4 metres @ 0.1gt/ Au from 128 metres
								144	150	6	1.4	6 metres @ 1.4g/t Au from 144 metres to EOH (incl. 2 metres @ 3.4g/t Au to EOH)
MPAC230*	270328	7134988	545	-60	250	152	AC	60	76	16	0.4	16 metres @ 0.4g/t Au from 60 metres (incl. 4 metres @ 0.7g/t Au)
								92	100	8	1.2	8 metres @ 1.2g/t Au from 92 metres (incl. 4 metres @ 2g/t Au)
								140	144	4	0.3	4 metres @ 0.3g/t Au from 140 metres
MPAC231*	270376	7135004	545	60	250	165	AC	108	112	4	0.2	4 metres @ 0.2g/t Au from 108 metres
				-				136	152	16	1	16 metres @ 1g/t Au from 136 metres (incl. 4 metres @ 2.9g/t Au)

*Previously released results (please refer to ASX announcement 19 January 2026)

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX B: JORC TABLE 1 – YANDAL PROJECT

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	•All drilling (prefix MPAC) and sampling was undertaken in an industry
techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to	standard manner.
	the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or
		•AC hole samples were collected on a 1 metre basis from a gravity-fed
	handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken
	as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	rotary splitter below the drill rig cyclone.
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity	•For each metre drilled, ‘A-bag’ splits (roughly 10% of the total sample)
	and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems	was collected directly from the splitter chute in pre-numbered calico
	used.	bags, with the remaining bulk sample being collected in a bucket below
		the splitter and ground dumped in rows of 20 metres.
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the
		•Each ground-dumped metre was scoop sampled using and placed in a
	Public Report.
		pre- numbered SKA* prefixed calico bag in 4 metre composites. Four
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be	metre composite samples ranged in weight from 2.5-3kg.
	relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m
		•The 1m A-bag splits were tied and stored in water-proof green bags at
	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	the drill pad for use in the case of re-splitting, additional QAQC analysis,
	where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.	or if the at-rig geologist determined 1m samples are to be preferentially
	Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules)	sent to the lab instead of SKA* 4m composites. When 1m A-bag
	may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	splits were submitted to the laboratory, an SKR* prefix calico bag
		was used.
		•Certified reference material was inserted into the sample sequence at a
		1:50 ratio (i.e., every SKA00 and SKA50 calico bag). Duplicate
		samples were collected at a 1:50 ratio (i.e., every SKA***25 and SKA
		***75) to give an overall QAQC ratio of 1:25 for all sampling.

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drilling	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	•Aircore drilling utilising the Bostech Aircore Core System (85- 87mm).
techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or
		•Rotary polycrystalline diamond composite (PDC) drill bits were utilized
	standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type,
	whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	at the top of fresh rock, or where ground was too hard for the standard
		aircore bit to penetrate.
		•Rotary hammer drill bits were used sparingly where veining prevented
		both the PDC and standard AC drill bits from penetrating.
Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	•AC samples were visually assessed for recovery.
recovery	and results assessed.
		•Samples were considered representative with generally good recovery.
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	Sample recovery was recorded per metre drilled.
	representative nature of the samples.
		•Samples were dry. Sample condition is recorded per metre drilled.
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and
		•No sample bias is observed.
	whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
	fine/coarse material.
Logging	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	•Aircore holes were logged qualitatively and quantitatively on a 1m basis.
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral
		•Qualitative: lithology, alteration, structure.
	Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,	•Quantitative: vein percentage; mineralisation (sulphide) percentage.
	channel, etc) photography.
		•All holes were logged for the entire length of hole.
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
		•All drilled metres for each AC hole were chipped, archived and
		photographed.
Sub-sampling	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	•AC chips were rotary split, sampled dry and recorded at the time of
techniques and		logging.
sample	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether
preparation	sampled wet or dry.

8

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the	•OREAS certified reference material (CRM) was inserted at a ratio of
	sample preparation technique.	1:50 throughout sampling. The grade ranges of the CRMs were selected
		based on grade populations and economic grade ranges. The reference
	• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
		material type was selected based on the geology, weathering, and
	maximise representivity of samples.	analysis method of the sample.
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in	•Field Duplicates and CRMs were submitted to the lab using unique
	situ material collected, including for instance results for field	Sample IDs at a ratio of 1:50 throughout sampling.
	duplicate/second- half sampling.
		•The entire 2.5-3kg AC 4m composite or 2.5-3kg 1m split was sent to
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
		ALS laboratory in Perth. All samples were analysed for gold via a 50g
	being sampled.	fire assay with an ICP-AES finish (method code Au-ICP22). All bottom
		of hole samples were submitted for full multi element analysis – four acid
		digest with ICP-MS finish (method code: ME-MS61).
		•The sample size was appropriate for the grain size of sampled material.
Quality of assay	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory	•For Fire Assay, all samples were sorted, dried at 105°C and weighed
data and	procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or	prior to crushing to 2mm. Crushed samples were then split and
laboratory tests	total.	pulverised to 75µm, with a QC specification of ensuring >85% passing
		< 75µm. 50g of pulverised sample was then analysed for Au by fire
	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc,
		assay and ICP-AES (low-grade) or gravimetric (ore-grade) finish.
	the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument
	make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their	•Four acid digest for full multi element analysis is categorised as a “near
	derivation, etc.	total” digestion method.
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,	•QA samples were inserted at a combined ratio of 1:25 throughout. Field
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels	duplicates were collected at a 1:50 ratio. OREAS certified reference
	of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	material (CRM) was inserted at a ratio of 1:50. The grade ranges of the
		CRMs were selected based on grade populations and economic grade
		ranges. The reference material type was selected based on the geology,
		weathering, and analysis method of the sample.

9

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Magnetic Susceptibility measurements were collected at one metre
		intervals utilising a KT-10 instrument. At the start of each hole, the KT-
		10 instrument was calibrated/checked against a reference material
		before collecting 1m interval data from sample piles.
		•A handheld Olympus Vanta XRF instrument was utilised to aid the at-
		rig geologist determining downhole lithologies. The instrument was
		calibrated at the start of each analysis session, with a QC reading taken
		on alternating Certified Reference Materials (Blank and OREAS45d) at
		a ratio of 1:20 samples. Handheld XRF readings were taken on
		pulverized material from dry bottom of hole samples systematically, and
		from dry samples throughout a hole where the geologist determined
		geochemical data was necessary to determine lithology.
Verification of	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	•Logging and sampling were recorded directly into LogChief, utilising
sampling and	alternative company personnel.	lookup tables and in-file validations, on a Toughbook by a geologist at
assaying		the rig.
	• The use of twinned holes.
		•Logs, handheld XRF geochemical data, Magnetic Susceptibility data
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification,
		and sampling were imported daily into Micromine for further validation
	data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	and geological confirmation.
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•When received, assay results were plotted on section and verified
		against neighbouring drill holes.
		•From time to time, assays will be repeated if they fail company QAQC
		protocols.
		•All sampling was routinely inspected by senior geological staff.
		Significant intersections were inspected by senior geological staff and
		Gateway corporate staff.
		•Data was validated daily by the Gateway Database Administrator, with
		import validation protocols in place. Data was exported daily to Mitchell
		River Group and externally validated and imported to the SQL database.

10

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•No adjustments have been made to assay data.
		•Data is managed and hosted by Mitchell River Group.
Location of data	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	•Drill collars were surveyed using a GARMIN GPSMap64 with expected
points	down- hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used	relative accuracy of approximately 3m.
	in Mineral Resource estimation.
		•Holes are located in MGA Zone 51.
	• Specification of the grid system used.
		•RLs were assigned a nominal value of 545m during drilling and
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	corrected during data import by draping on the DGPS-generated
		surface DTM. Data points for creation of the surface topography were
		collected by DownUnder Surveys in 2022 on a 50m grid spacing across
		the entire Horse Well Region.
		•Collar locations are to be updated at a later date by DGPS.
Data spacing	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	•Aircore holes have been designed on a 100 metre (East-West) by 400
and distribution		metre (North-South) grid spacing. In some instances, this spacing has
	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the
		been reduced as there is already a good handle on the mafic-
	degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral	intermediate contact (based on recently collected historic BOH
	Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications	sampling).
	applied.
		•Each drill hole was positioned to an Azimuth of 250 degrees at a dip of
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
		-60 degrees and drilled to blade refusal.
		•1 metre split samples were collected from the rotary splitter located
		directly below the drill rig cyclone and stored at the drill pad.
		•4 metre composite samples were collected throughout each hole.

11

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Significant intercepts were based on 4 metre composites grading
		greater than 0.1g/t Au. However, where samples were taken at or near
		bottom of hole, significant intercepts were based on sample intervals
		less than 4 metres (either single metres BOH splits or 2 or 3 metre
		composite samples), depending on the final depth. These intercepts
		were still deemed significant if they graded greater than 0.1g/t Au
Orientation of	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	•Further drilling is required to fully evaluate the initial aircore drilling
data in relation	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering	results.
to geological	the deposit type.
structure		•Drilling has been conducted perpendicular to interpreted regional
	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of	structures.
	key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling
		•Drilling has been spaced at 100 metres (East-West) to ensure adequate
	bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
		coverage across regional structures.
		•The orientation of drilling is not considered to introduce a sampling bias.
Sample security	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Gateway Drilling:
		•Sampling was recorded in both hardcopy and digital format. These were
		collected by company personnel and delivered directly to the laboratory
		via GML personnel.
		Pre-Gateway Drilling:
		•The data was originally maintained by Doray Minerals Ltd.
Audits or reviews	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•Sampling procedures throughout the drilling process were monitored
		and supervised by senior geological staff.
		•Historic data has been validated by the Mitchell River Group and is
		deemed accurate and precise.

12

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•All results reported by the Laboratory and data exported by Gateway Mining Ltd is externally validated by the Mitchell River Group prior to importing into the database. •Monthly QAQC reports and recommendations are generated for all drilling, geochemical and assay data by Mitchell River Group.
Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in section 1, also apply to this section)
Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including	•The Mustang-Pony trend is located on 100% owned Gateway tenure
tenement and	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures,	(tenement ID’s) E69/1772 and E69/2765.
land tenure	partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites,
status	wilderness or national park and environmental settings.	•MW Royalty Co Pty Ltd holds a 1% gross revenue royalty over the above
		tenure.
	• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any
	known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•Exploration prior to Alloy Resources in the region was minimal and
done by other		limited to shallow RAB and air-core drilling completed in the mid – 1990s,
parties		all of which had been sampled, assayed, and logged and records held
		by the Company. This early work, including aeromagnetic data
		interpretation, was focused on gold and provided anomalous samples
		which was the focus of this period of exploration.
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•Archaean aged gold prospects with common host rocks and structures
		related to mesothermal gold mineralisation as found throughout the
		Yilgarn Craton of Western Australia

13

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the	•Refer to tabulations in the body of this announcement.
Information	exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for
		•Gateway drillhole details with assays >0.1g/t Au over 4 metre composite
	all Material drill holes:
		and 1 metre split samples are summarised in Appendix A.
	o easting and northing of the drill hole collar
		•Historic intercepts across the project have been released in numerous
	o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in	previous ASX releases by GML (for example, please refer to ASX
	metres) of the drill hole collar	announcement dated 26thAugust 2025 16 December 2025 and 19
		January 2026).
	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	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	•No top-cuts have been applied when reporting results.
aggregation	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades)
methods	and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	•The primary gold determination is reported where any secondary
		assaying does not differ significantly from the primary.
	• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade
		•The AC intervals are taken as values >0.1g/t Au with maximum internal
	results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for
	such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such	dilution of 4 metres.
	aggregations should be shown in detail.
		•No metal equivalent values are used for reporting exploration results.
	• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
		•No diamond drilling results are reported in this announcement.
	should be clearly stated.

14

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Relationship	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of	•Further drilling is required to fully evaluate these initial AC drill intercepts.
between	Exploration Results.
mineralisation		•AC drilling has been conducted perpendicular to regional structures.
widths and	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle
		•AC drilling has been spaced at 50 metres (East-West) across the
intercept	is known, its nature should be reported.
		Haflinger prospect to ensure adequate coverage across regional
lengths
	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there	structures.
	should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true
		•Downhole AC intercept lengths are reported.
	width not known’).
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	•Please refer to the main body of the announcement.
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being
	reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill
	hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	•A summary of exploration results are contained within Appendix A.
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or
	widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
	Results.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	•Titanium (Ti)/Zirconium (Zr) ratios were calculated from the work outlined
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical	by J.A Hallberg from the Journal of Geochemical Exploration (A
exploration data	survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and	geochemical aid to igneous rock type identification in deeply weathered
	method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density,	terrain – Journal of Geochemical Exploration, Volume 20, Issue 1,
	groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential	February 1984, Pages 1-8).
	deleterious or contaminating substances.
		•The method is based on Ti/Zr ratio which is little affected either by
		primary alteration or weathering and adequately defines compositional
		fields for major igneous rock types. For volcanic rocks Ti/Zr ratios are
		rhyolite <4< dacite <12< andesite <60< basalt (Appendix B). Ultramafic
		rocks cannot be discriminated from mafic rocks by Ti/Zr ratio but are
		generally distinguished by high Cr. These have not been highlighted in
		this announcement, but rather the bulk Ti/Zr ratios for mapping the mafic-
		intermediate contacts.

15

==> picture [75 x 46] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Further work	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	•Further aircore and RC drilling to further define and test this emerging
	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	gold system.
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

16