Skip to main content

AI assistant

Sign in to chat with this filing

The assistant answers questions, extracts KPIs, and summarises risk factors directly from the filing text.

Sign up Log in

LODE RESOURCES LTD Capital/Financing Update 2025

Oct 16, 2025

65220_rns_2025-10-16_9ec5ba7c-2203-4561-a66b-e12edb6259f9.pdf

Capital/Financing Update

Open in viewer

Opens in your device viewer

ASX Announcement | 17 October 2025 ASX Code: LDR

==> picture [199 x 42] intentionally omitted <==

31.1% ANTIMONY INTERCEPTED IN INAUGURAL DRILLING AT MAGWOOD, NSW

Lode Resources Ltd (‘Lode’ or ‘Company’) (ASX: LDR) is pleased announce the initial drill results from first pass drilling at the Magwood Antimony Project located in the New England region of NSW.

Highlights

  • Drill core assay results of up to 31.1% Antimony have been received from inaugural drilling at the historic Magwood antimony mine located in the New England region of NSW and just 40km north-northwest of the Hillgrove antimony mine.

  • The Magwood structure can be traced for some 2.5km to the south-southeast.

  • Drill intercept assays of Stibnite mineralisation include:

    • ➢ 9.92% Sb over 4.8m in drill hole MAG010 incl. 19.61% Sb over 2.4m in drill hole MAG010 incl. 28.57% Sb over 1.3m in drill hole MAG010

    • ➢ 1.96% Sb over 3.0m in drill hole MAG010 incl. 16.60% Sb over 0.3m in drill hole MAG010

    • ➢ 2.20% Sb over 1.9m in drill hole MAG010

    • ➢ 19.20% Sb over 0.2m in drill hole MAG008

    • ➢ 1.28% Sb over 0.9m in drill hole MAG007

  • Drill assays of stope fill with stibnite mineralisation include:

    • ➢ 3.08% Sb recovered from a 12.4m void in drill hole MAG002

    • ➢ 2.66% Sb recovered from a 1.7m void in drill hole MAG010

    • ➢ 0.22% Sb recovered from a 7.9m void in drill hole MAG004

  • These drill assays indicate:

  • ➢ The potential for significant unmined in situ antimony vein style mineralisation, located adjacent to existing workings, which were missed by historical miners due to a complete dearth of any drilling Two individual core assays from drill hole MAG010 graded 31.1% Sb and 26.4% Sb in 82-82.6m and 82.6-83.3m respectively demonstrating the potential for massive stibnite style mineralisation; and

  • ➢ The potential for significant amounts of loose stope fill containing high grade stibnite mineralisation as a result of historical shrink stope mining and hand sorting.

  • Magwood has never been previously drilled despite being Australia’s leading primary antimony producer for periods between 1920 and 1970.

  • LDR controls a formidable and strategic 1,914 km[2] of exploration licences prospectives for antimony mineralisation including multiple recorded occurrences. LDR is the largest holder of exploration ground in the New England Fold Belt.

  • Surface exploration is currently focused on defining drill targets in the vicinity of the Magwood antimony mine.

Lode’s Managing Director Ted Leschke said: “These inaugural drill results from the Magwood antimony mine are extremely encouraging given the strong endowment of intercepted primary antimony mineralisation that was missed by previous mining and the presence of mineralised stope fill. Together, the Magwood Antimony Project and the Montezuma Silver & Antimony Project, where drilling is ongoing, place Lode Resources in a formidable position during a time where the western world has been caught short of critical metals. We are currently planning further programs at both projects”.

ASX Code: LDR | ACN: 637 512 415 | www.loderesources.com

A: Level 15, Governor Macquarie Tower, 1 Farrer Place Sydney NSW 2000 | P: +61 2 9199 8017

| E: [email protected]

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Magwood Antimony Project – Inaugural High-Grade Drill Results

Lode Resources Ltd (‘Lode’ or ‘Company’) (ASX: LDR) is pleased announce that drill core intercept assay results have been received from initial drilling at the historic Magwood antimony mine located in the New England region of NSW and just 40km north-northwest of the Hillgrove antimony mine. These results are summarised in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Magwood Antimony Project – Initial drill core intercept assays

Hole Number
From
To
Interval Sb grade
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)		 Hole Number
From
To
Interval Sb grade
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)		 Hole Number
From
To
Interval Sb grade
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)		 Rock Recovered
MAG002 66.0 67.1
1.1
0.15		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG002 81.3 82.0
0.7
0.13		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG004 41.5 41.6
0.1
9.65		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG004 49.5 51.0
1.5
0.17		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG007 26.0 27.0
1.0
0.08		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG007 35.7 36.6
0.9
1.28		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG007 164.3 164.8
0.5
0.11		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 53.0 55.0
2.0
0.17		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 61.0 61.2
0.2
1.75		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 66.5 66.7
0.2
19.20		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 68.0 69.0
1.0
0.25		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 73.5 75.0
1.5
0.86		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 74.3 75.0
0.7
0.88		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 77.0 78.9
1.9
2.20		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 81.5 86.3
4.8
9.92		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
incl. 82.0 84.4
2.4
19.61		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
incl. 82.0 83.3
1.3
28.57		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 103.0 106.0
3.0
1.96		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
incl. 104.0 104.3
0.3
16.60		 In situ stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 107.2 107.7
0.5
0.20		 In situ stibnite mineralisation

The drill assays in Table 1 indicate the potential for significant unmined in situ antimony mineralisation, located adjacent to existing workings that was either missed by historical miners due to a complete dearth of any drilling or as a result of “high-grading”. Two individual core assays from drill hole MAG010 graded 31.1% Sb in 82-82.6m and 26.4% Sb in 82.6-83.3m demonstrating the potential for massive stibnite style mineralisation.

Backfilled mine voids were also intercepted in seven drill holes with three returning sufficient sample material for a single assay per void as shown In Table 2. Historical mining utilised the shrink stope mining method with ore often hand sorted. This appears to have resulted the finer stibnite mineralisation being placed underfoot as stope backfill as mining progressed upwards.

Table 2. Magwood Antimony Project – Mineralised stope fill assays*

Hole Number Void From Void To Void Length Sb grade
Rock Recovered
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)*		 Hole Number Void From Void To Void Length Sb grade
Rock Recovered
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)*		 Hole Number Void From Void To Void Length Sb grade
Rock Recovered
(m)
(m)
(m)
(%)*
MAG002 85.0 97.4
12.4
3.08
Stope fill incl. stibnite mineralisation
MAG004 41.6 49.5
7.9
0.22
Stope fill incl. stibnite mineralisation
MAG008 45.9 53.0
7.1
0.04
Stope fill incl. stibnite mineralisation
MAG010 79.5 81.2
1.7
2.66
Stope fill incl. stibnite mineralisation

*Note the recoveries of loose mineralised stope fill as drill core is very low (approx.1%) and, whilst sampling is not selective, the resultant assays are unlikely to be sufficiently representative to be used in any resource calculation. Nevertheless, it is well known that substantial past extraction of mineralised stope fill was carried out over a significant period at the nearby Hillgrove antimony mine where historical shrink stope mining and hand sorting methods also occurred.

2

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1. Magwood Antimony Project – Isometric view of initial drill core intercept assays results and recovered mineralised back fill assays

==> picture [502 x 438] intentionally omitted <==

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

7.1m @ 0.04% Sb from 74.3m
2.0m @ 0.17% Sb from 77.0m
0.2m @ 1.75% Sb from 79.5m
0.2m @ 19.20% Sb from 81.5m
1.0m @ 0.25% Sb from 81.5m
1.5m @ 0.86% Sb from 81.5m
MAG006
0.7m @ 0.88% Sb from 74.3m MAG004
1.9m @ 2.20% Sb from 77.0m
1.7m @ 2.66% Sb from 79.5m MAG003 MAG001 12.4m @ 3.08% Sb from 85m
4.8m @ 9.92% Sb from 81.5m
incl. 2.4m @ 19.61% Sb from 82.0m MAG005
MAG008
MAG002
3.0m @ 1.96% Sb from 103.0m
incl. 0.3m @ 16.60% Sb from 104.0m
0.5m @ 0.20% Sb from 107.2m
MAG010
MAG007
Stope fill with stibnite mineralisation
----- End of picture text -----

Historical records show that Magwood’s mined grades were very high by today’s standards with historical reports indicating yearly production grades ranging from 4% to 62% Sb for all available records.

The vein/shear filling stibnite (Sb2S3) mineralisation at Magwood was mined historically via underground shafts and adits. Mining reached a depth of 300m below surface however there is strong evidence of selective mining, especially in the early years and, together with the lack of drilling, suggests that significant remnant mineralisation remains within the mine at grades that would be considered highgrade in today’s terms, especially given current high Sb prices.

By way of comparison the Hillgrove Mine is reported to have a Measured and Indicted (M&I) Resource grade of 1.6% Sb whilst Australia’s only currently operating antimony mine, the Costerfield Mine in Victoria, has a M&I resource grade of 3.0% Sb. Primary antimony mines are uncommon and both Hillgrove and Costerfield are considered gold mines with accessory antimony.

Lode’s initial drilling program is the first for the Magwood antimony mine and is the only significant exploration last 50 years and has never been drilled despite being Australia’s primary antimony producer prior to the development of the Hillgrove Antimony and Gold Mine. Magwood is a priority target as well as a type model for Lode’s exploration planning.

3

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2. Magwood Antimony Project – Plan view of initial drill core intercept assays results and recovered mineralised back fill assays

==> picture [493 x 283] intentionally omitted <==

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

MAG007
7.1m @ 0.04% Sb from 74.3m
2.0m @ 0.17% Sb from 77.0m
0.2m @ 1.75% Sb from 79.5m
0.2m @ 19.20% Sb from 81.5m
1.0m @ 0.25% Sb from 81.5m
1.5m @ 0.86% Sb from 81.5m
MAG002
0.7m @ 0.88% Sb from 74.3m
1.9m @ 2.20% Sb from 77.0m
1.7m @ 2.66% Sb from 79.5m
4.8m @ 9.92% Sb from 81.5m MAG005
incl. 2.4m @ 19.61% Sb from 82.0m MAG006
12.4m @ 3.08% Sb from 85m
MAG008 MAG004
3.0m @ 1.96% Sb from 103.0m
incl. 0.3m @ 16.60% Sb from 104.0m
MAG010
0.5m @ 0.20% Sb from 107.2m
MAG001
MAG003
----- End of picture text -----*

==> picture [141 x 10] intentionally omitted <==

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

Stope fill with stibnite mineralisation
----- End of picture text -----*

Photo 1. Drone borne photo of Adit 3 (150m depth) underground workings

==> picture [240 x 239] intentionally omitted <==

Photo 2. 19.61% Sb over 2.4m from 82m within 9.92% Sb over 4.8m from 81.5m (MAG010)

==> picture [182 x 239] intentionally omitted <==

4

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

New England Antimony Exploration Licences – 1,914 km[2 ]

Lode’s New England exploration licences EL9662 and EL9319 cover multiple strategic antimony prospects, including the historical Magwood antimony mine. These antimony prospects, together with Lode’s Montezuma Antimony Project located in Tasmania, forms a strategic exploration portfolio that is highly prospective for one of the world’s most critical metals.

In total there are 19 recorded antimony prospects within the Exploration Licences EL9662 and EL9319, both controlled 100% by Lode. Almost no drilling has occurred within Lode’s antimony project areas despite the geology being considered highly prospective for orogenic structurally-controlled antimony mineralisation. It is highly relevant that surface work is almost nonexistent.

The exploration licences prospective for antimony covers an area of 1,914 km[2] and forms a large proportion of the approximately 2,741km[2] of exploration licences that Lode owns in NSW. This makes Lode the largest holder of exploration ground in the New England Fold Belt.

Exploration within the New England Fold Belt has been limited since the 1970’s with one exploration hole drilled for every fourteen holes drilled in the Lachlan Fold Belt attesting to the tremendous discovery potential that may be latent within Lode’s strategic exploration portfolio. Field activities have commenced including access discussions with surface landowners.

Figure 3: Location of Lode’s EL9662 With Multiple Antimony Prosects

==> picture [495 x 380] intentionally omitted <==

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

Lode’s EL9662
1,105 km [2]
Multiple Antimony
Prospects
----- End of picture text -----

5

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Location of Lode’s EL9662 & EL9319 Covering Multiple Antimony Prospects

==> picture [478 x 354] intentionally omitted <==

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

Lode’s EL9319 (809 km [2] ) Magwood
Multiple Sb prospects Antimony Mine
Lode’s EL9662 (1,105 km [2] )
Multiple Sb prospects
----- End of picture text -----

This announcement has been approved and authorised by Lode Resource Ltd.’s Managing Director, Ted Leschke.

For more information on Lode Resources and to subscribe for our regular updates, please visit our website at www.loderesources.com or email [email protected]

No Material Changes

The Company confirms it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in this announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the exploration activities in this market announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Competent Person’s Statement

The information in this Report that relates to Exploration Results for LDR’s NSW projects is based on information compiled by Mr Jason Beckton, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Beckton, who is Director at LDR, has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr Beckton has a beneficial interest as a shareholder and an option holder of LDR and consents to the inclusion in this Report of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears.

6

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix I

JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1.

(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 ofdetailedinformation.		 •
Diamond drilling techniques were used to
obtain samples.
•
HQ3 and NQ2 core was logged and sample
intervals assigned based on the geology.
•
The core to be sampled was sawn in half and
bagged according to sample intervals.
Intervals range from 0.2m to 2m.
•
Blanks and standards were inserted at >5%
where appropriate.
•
Samples were sampled by a qualified
geologist.
•
Sample preparation comprised drying (DRY-
21), weighed, crushing (CRU-31) and
pulverised (PUL-32), refer to ALS codes.
•
The assay methods used were ME-ICP61, Au-
AA25 and XRF15b (refer to ALS assay codes).
ME-ICP61 (25g) is a four-acid digestion with
ICP-AES finish. Au-AA25 (30g) is a fire assay
method. XRF15b is an X-Ray Fluorescence
method.
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 if so, by what method,
etc).		 •
All drilling is Diamond drilling (core), HQ3 &
NQ2 in size.
•
Core was collected using a split tube for HQ3
and a standard tube for NQ2.
•
Core was not orientated.
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.		 •
Core recoveries are measured using
standard industry best practice.
•
Core loss is recorded in the logging.
•
Core recovery in the surface lithologies is
poor.
•
Core recovery in fresh rock is excellent with
99% recovered from 3m downhole depth.

7

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

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.		 •
Holes are logged to a level of detail that would
support mineral resource estimation.
•
Qualitative logging includes lithology,
alteration, texture, colour and structures.
•
Quantitative logging includes sulphide and
gangue mineral percentages.
•
All drill holes have been logged in full.
•
All drill core was photographed wet and dry.
•
Whether logging is qualitative or
quantitative in nature. Core (or
costean, channel, etc) photography.
•
The total length and percentage of
the relevant intersections logged.		 •
Holes are logged to a level of detail that would
support mineral resource estimation.
•
Qualitative logging includes lithology,
alteration, texture, colour and structures.
•
Quantitative logging includes sulphide and
gangue mineral percentages.
•
All drill holes have been logged in full.
•
All drill core was photographed wet and dry.
•
100% of the core is 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 grain size of the
material being sampled.		 •
Core was prepared using standard industry
best practice.
•
The core was sawn in half using a diamond
core saw and half core was sent to ALS
Brisbane for assay.
•
No duplicate sampling has been conducted.
•
Samples intervals ranged from 0.2m to 2m.
The average sample size was 1m in length.
The sample size is considered appropriate for
the material being sampled.
•
The samples were sent to ALS Brisbane for
assay.
•
Blanks and standards were inserted at >5%
where appropriate.
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.		 •
Samples were stored in a secure location and
transported to the ALS laboratory in Brisbane
QLD via a certified courier. Sample
preparation comprised drying (DRY-21),
weighed, crushing (CRU-31) and pulverised
(PUL-32).
•
The assay methods used were ME-ICP61,
Au-AA25 and XRF15b (refer to ALS assay
codes). ME-ICP61 (25g) is a four-acid
digestion with ICP-AES finish. Au-AA25 (30g)
is a fire assay method. XRF15b is an X-Ray
Fluorescence method.
•
Certified standards and blanks were inserted
at a rate of >5% at the appropriate locations.
These are checked when assay results are
received to make sure they fall within the
accepted limits.
•
The assay methods employed are considered
appropriate for near total digestion.

8

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

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 anyadjustment to assaydata.
•
Laboratory results have been reviewed by the
Exploration Manager.
•
Significant intersections are reviewed by the
Exploration Manager and Managing Director.
•
No twin holes were drilled.
•
Commercial laboratory certificates are
supplied by ALS.
•
The certified standards and blanks are
checked.
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.		 •
Drill hole collar locations were recorded using
RTK GPS (+- 0.02m).
•
Grid system used is GDA94 UTM zone 56
•
Down hole surveys are conducted with a
digital magnetic multi-shot camera at 30m
intervals.
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.		 •
The holes drilled were for exploration purposes
and were not drilled on a grid pattern.
•
Drill hole spacing is considered appropriate for
exploration purposes.
•
The data spacing, distribution and geological
understanding is not currently sufficient for the
estimation of mineral resource estimation.
•
No 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.		 •
Drill holes are orientated perpendicular to the
perceived strike where possible however given
gorge terrain in the area drilling positions are
limited.
•
The orientation of drilling relative to key
mineralised structures is not considered likely
to introduce sampling bias.
•
The orientation of sampling is considered
appropriate for the current geological
interpretation of the mineral style.
•
The orientation of the mineralisation
intersected in at Magwood is generally thought
to strike NE-SW.
Sample security •
The measures taken to ensure
sample security.		 •
Samples have been overseen by the Project
Manager during transport from site to the
assay laboratories.
Audits or
reviews		 •
The results of any audits or reviews
of sampling techniques and data.		 •
No audits or reviews have been carried out at
this point.

9

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

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 thetime of
reporting along with any
known impediments to
obtaining a
licence to operate in the
area.		 •
The sampling was conducted on EL9662
•
EL9662 is 100% held by Lode Metals Pty Ltd.
•
Native title does not exist over EL9662
•
All leases/tenements are in good standing
Exploration
done by
other parties		 •
Acknowledgment and
appraisal of exploration
by other parties.		 •
Limited historic rock and soil sampling.
Geology •
Deposit type, geological
setting and style of
mineralisation.		 •
EL9662 falls within the southern portion of the New England
Orogen (NEO). EL9662 hosts numerous antimony and gold
occurrences. The Magwood mineralisation is likely orogenic
related and similar to other orogenic systems in the area.
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,
including, easting and
northing, elevation or
RL, dip and azimuth,
down hole length,
interception depth and
hole length.
•
If the exclusion of this
information is justified
the Competent Person
should clearly explain
why this is the
case.		 •
See row below.
•
The orientation of the mineralisation intersected in MAG010 is
thought to be NE-SW.
•
Only drill assays from meaningful mineralised intercepts are
tabulated below. A meaningful intercept is generally
determined have an endowment > 0.05% x.metres Sb.

10

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

Magwood Antimony Project - drill hole surveys
Magwood Antimony Project-drill hole assays		 Magwood Antimony Project - drill hole surveys
Magwood Antimony Project-drill hole assays		 Magwood Antimony Project - drill hole surveys
Magwood Antimony Project-drill hole assays		 Magwood Antimony Project - drill hole surveys
Magwood Antimony Project-drill hole assays		 Magwood Antimony Project - drill hole surveys
Magwood Antimony Project-drill hole assays		 Sbgrade
%
0.1
0.19
0.12
0.14
3.08
9.65
0.219
0.318
0.102
0.083
1.275
0.109
0.039
0.288
0.052
1.750
19.200
0.252
2.370
0.136
0.879
1.455
1.565
Sample Hole ID From To Interval Sbgrade
Number (m) (m) (m) %
D06106 MAG002 66.0 66.5 0.5 0.1
D06107 MAG002 66.5 67.1 0.6 0.19
D06122 MAG002 81.3 81.6 0.3 0.12
D06123 MAG002 81.6 82.0 0.4 0.14
D06128 MAG002 85.0 97.4 12.4 3.08
D06165 MAG004 41.5 41.6 0.1 9.65
D06168 MAG004 41.6 49.5 7.9 0.219
D06169 MAG004 49.5 50.0 0.5 0.318
D06170 MAG004 50.0 51.0 1.0 0.102
D06184 MAG007 26.0 27.0 1.0 0.083
D06193 MAG007 35.7 36.6 0.9 1.275
D06207 MAG007 164.3 164.8 0.5 0.109
D06217 MAG008 45.9 53.0 7.1 0.039
D06218 MAG008 53.0 54.0 1.0 0.288
D06219 MAG008 54.0 55.0 1.0 0.052
D06226 MAG008 61.0 61.2 0.2 1.750
D06234 MAG008 66.5 66.7 0.2 19.200
D06237 MAG008 68.0 69.0 1.0 0.252
D06243 MAG008 73.5 74.0 0.5 2.370
D06246 MAG008 74.2 75.0 0.8 0.136
D06263 MAG010 74.3 75.0 0.7 0.879
D06264 MAG010 77.0 77.5 0.5 1.455
D06265 MAG010 77.5 77.8 0.3 1.565

11

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

D06266 D06266 MAG010 MAG010 MAG010 77.8 78.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.388 0.388
D06267 MAG010 78.5 78.9 0.4 6.800
D06269 MAG010 78.9 79.5 0.6 0.032
D06271 MAG010 79.5 81.2 1.7 2.660
D06273 MAG010 81.2 81.5 0.3 0.086
D06274 MAG010 81.5 82.0 0.5 0.452
D06275 MAG010 82.0 82.6 0.6 31.100
D06279 MAG010 82.6 83.3 0.7 26.400
D06283 MAG010 83.3 84.0 0.7 3.320
D06286 MAG010 84.0 84.4 0.4 19.000
D06288 MAG010 84.4 85.0 0.6 0.160
D06289 MAG010 85.0 85.6 0.6 0.262
D06290 MAG010 85.6 86.0 0.4 0.094
D06291 MAG010 86.0 86.3 0.3 0.081
D06298 MAG010 103.0 104.0 1.0 0.762
D06299 MAG010 104.0 104.3 0.3 16.600
D06302 MAG010 104.3 105.0 0.7 0.102
D06303 MAG010 105.0 106.0 1.0 0.069
D06306 MAG010 107.2 107.7 0.5 0.200
Magwood Antimony
Sample Hole Void from Void to Void length Fill sample
weight		 Sb
grade		 Comments
ID ID (m) (m) (m) (kg) %
D06128 MAG002 85 97.4 12.4 1.31 3.08 Void containingmineralised fill
D06168 MAG004 41.6 49.5 7.9 0.92 0.22 Void containingmineralised fill
N/A MAG005 30.15 39.15 9 Void but no fill recovered
N/A MAG007 33.3 35.7 2.4 Void but no fill recovered
D06217 MAG008 45.9 53 7.1 0.25 0.039 Void containingmineralised fill
N/A MAG009 78.5 80.5 2 Void but no fill recovered
D06271 MAG010 79.5 81.15 1.65 0.64 2.66 Void containingmineralised fill
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		 •
Intersection calculation are weighted to sample length.
•
No grade capping has been applied.
•
The assumptions used for reporting of metal equivalent
values and the metal equivalent formula are clearly stated
below
D06266 D06266 MAG010 MAG010 MAG010 77.8 78.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.388 0.388
D06267 MAG010 78.5 78.9 0.4 6.800
D06269 MAG010 78.9 79.5 0.6 0.032
D06271 MAG010 79.5 81.2 1.7 2.660
D06273 MAG010 81.2 81.5 0.3 0.086
D06274 MAG010 81.5 82.0 0.5 0.452
D06275 MAG010 82.0 82.6 0.6 31.100
D06279 MAG010 82.6 83.3 0.7 26.400
D06283 MAG010 83.3 84.0 0.7 3.320
D06286 MAG010 84.0 84.4 0.4 19.000
D06288 MAG010 84.4 85.0 0.6 0.160
D06289 MAG010 85.0 85.6 0.6 0.262
D06290 MAG010 85.6 86.0 0.4 0.094
D06291 MAG010 86.0 86.3 0.3 0.081
D06298 MAG010 103.0 104.0 1.0 0.762
D06299 MAG010 104.0 104.3 0.3 16.600
D06302 MAG010 104.3 105.0 0.7 0.102
D06303 MAG010 105.0 106.0 1.0 0.069
D06306 MAG010 107.2 107.7 0.5 0.200
Magwood Antimony
Sample Hole Void from Void to Void length Fill sample
weight		 Sb
grade		 Comments
ID ID (m) (m) (m) (kg) %
D06128 MAG002 85 97.4 12.4 1.31 3.08 Void containingmineralised fill
D06168 MAG004 41.6 49.5 7.9 0.92 0.22 Void containingmineralised fill
N/A MAG005 30.15 39.15 9 Void but no fill recovered
N/A MAG007 33.3 35.7 2.4 Void but no fill recovered
D06217 MAG008 45.9 53 7.1 0.25 0.039 Void containingmineralised fill
N/A MAG009 78.5 80.5 2 Void but no fill recovered
D06271 MAG010 79.5 81.15 1.65 0.64 2.66 Void containingmineralised fill
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		 •
Intersection calculation are weighted to sample length.
•
No grade capping has been applied.
•
The assumptions used for reporting of metal equivalent
values and the metal equivalent formula are clearly stated
below

12

==> picture [157 x 50] intentionally omitted <==

any reporting of metal
equivalent values should
be clearlystated.
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’).		 •
The orientation of the mineralisation intersected in MAG010 is
thought to be NE-SW.
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 plans and sections.		 •
Refer to plans and sections within report

13

More from LODE RESOURCES LTD

Regulatory Filings 2026
Jun 2
Director's Dealing 2026
May 27
Board/Management Information 2026
May 25
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
May 6
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
May 6
Major Shareholding Notification 2026
Apr 30
Interim / Quarterly Report 2026
Apr 29
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 23
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 23
Share Issue/Capital Change 2026
Apr 16
View all filings →