ODYSSEY GOLD LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2021

Jan 13, 2021

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT

14 January 2021

ONGOING DATA REVIEW HIGHLIGHTS HIGH-GRADE POTENTIAL AT BOTTLE DUMP

Odyssey Gold Limited (ASX:ODY) (“Odyssey” or “Company”) is pleased to advise that ongoing collation and review of historical data for the high-grade Tuckanarra and Stakewell gold exploration projects continues to enhance their excellent prospectivity.

A comprehensive review of the extensive historical exploration data is ongoing, and has uncovered a number of previously unannounced high-grade drilling intercepts at Bottle Dump (Tuckanarra) , which remain unmined, including:

• 30m @ 3.7g/t Au (BTD100 from 87m)

• 13m @ 8.5g/t Au (BT128 from 15m)

• 8m @ 10.3g/t Au (BT123 from 88m)

• 2m @ 15.8/t Au (BT107 from 81m)

• 8m @ 6.3g/t Au (BT138 from 80m)

• 12m @ 4.5g/t Au (BT108 from 69m)

These drill results significantly enhance the down plunge potential at Bottle Dump.

Executive Director, Matt Syme commented:

“The Odyssey team is very pleased that our review and modelling of the extensive historical exploration dataset continues to enhance the potential at Tuckanarra.

“Bottle Dump is emerging as an exciting, high priority target given the down plunge potential revealed by these and earlier results.

“The Company is looking forward to further results from the ongoing review and collation of historic exploration data as well as the commencement of our maiden drill program in coming weeks.”

For further information, please contact:

Matt Syme

Executive Director Tel: +61 8 9322 6322

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

OVERVIEW

The acquisition of the Tuckanarra and Stakewell gold projects positions Odyssey to become the premier gold exploration company in the Murchison Goldfields. This historic goldfield still delivers major production from Westgold Resources Limited and Ramelius Resources Limited and has the potential for substantial discoveries utilising modern exploration, highlighted by the recent success of Musgrave Minerals Limited and Spectrum Metals Limited.

==> picture [383 x 509] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Tuckanarra & Stakewell Project Location

Odyssey now controls a highly prospective footprint in the Meekatharra-Cue belt, with over 30km of strike of highly fertile banded iron formation (“ BIF ”) and greenstones, with extensive gold mining history and outstanding exploration potential. Both the Tuckanarra and Stakewell projects have a number of excellent drill targets based on previous mining and drilling which demonstrate high-grade mineralisation continuing at depth and/or along strike.

2

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

LOCAL GEOLOGY AND MINERALISATION

The projects are within the Meekatharra-Wydgee Greenstone belt within the north-eastern Murchison domain covering Archean basement rocks, situated within the “Meekatharra structural zone”, a major regional, north-east trending shear dominated zone, about 50 to 60km wide, stretching from Meekatharra through the Cue region as far south as Mount Magnet. The major shear zone is dominated by north and northeast trending folds and shears.

The Tuckanarra greenstone belt (which hosts both the Tuckanarra and Stakewell projects) comprises a series of mafic and inter-banded mafic and iron formations, with a variable component ‐ of clastic sediments (greywackes and minor shales). The sequence is folded into a south westerly plunging anticline with a well-developed axial planar cleavage and numerous fractures, beddingparallel faults, and shears. The belt extends northwards to Stakewell and east to the Reedy’s mining centre.

==> picture [363 x 483] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: The regional geology across both Tuckanarra & Stakewell with initial key targets

3

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

TUCKANARRA GOLD PROJECT

Odyssey acquired an 80% interest in the Tuckanarra Gold Project from Canadian-listed gold producer, Monument Mining Limited (TSV-V: MMY) (“ Monument ”) in late 2020.

Tuckanarra, consists of one mining licence, two exploration licences and seven prospecting licences covering a total of 52km[2] , ideally located along the Great Northern Highway between Cue and Meekatharra.

The Tuckanarra goldfield historically produced approximately 27,000oz at an average grade of approximately 49g/t Au in the early 1900s and Metana Minerals NL subsequently mined approximately 95,000oz at an average grade of 2.8g/t Au from a number of small pits between 19881994.

Each of the four main historical pits at Tuckanarra (Bottle Dump, Maybelle, Cable and Bollard) boasts high-grade mineralisation open along strike and/or at depth. Numerous historical shafts point to additional targets not fully tested with modern exploration.

==> picture [480 x 361] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Tuckanarra Project Map outlining the multiple targets

In addition, as a result of the acquisition, Odyssey has access to Monument’s 300,000tpa Burnakura gold process plant located 25km from Odyssey’s projects. In the event the Company generates mineable ore reserves, Odyssey will preferentially process ore at Burnakura, subject to commercial terms.

4

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

At acquisition, Tuckanarra came with an extensive drilling and geochemical database with over 2,949 drill holes for 110,231m (average depth 37.4m) and a database of 6,940 soils/rock samples. Only 1% of holes are deeper than 100m. Additionally, there is a detailed airborne magnetic survey over the area which will aid in structural targeting.

Historical (unmined) drill intersections (as previously announced) include:

• 5m @ 156g/t Au (PAC142 from 6m) including 1m @ 776g/t Au from 6m - Drogue

• 28m @ 6g/t Au (PRC004 from 35m) including 10m @ 15g/t Au from 35m - Cable

• 7m @ 67g/t Au (92TRC0334 from 43m) including 5m @ 94g/t Au from 43m - Cable

• o 3m @ 36g/t Au (PAC086 from 15m) - Cable

• 5m @ 42g/t Au (92TRC0220 from 51m) including 2m @ 102g/t Au from 51m - Cable

BOTTLE DUMP

==> picture [483 x 356] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Birds eye view of Bottle Dump

5

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [483 x 213] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5: Images from the eastern end of the Bottle Dump pit showing the visual BIF mineralisation

Bottle Dump is the eastern most pit at Tuckanarra. The gold mineralisation is hosted within a subvertical band of sulphidic sediments and BIF that trends in an east – west direction. Mining here has produced a large open pit to a depth of about 70m and the drilling beneath the current pit floor suggests that a significant high-grade shoot plunges steeply to the east at the eastern end of the pit and potentially also to the west. The thickness and tenor of this shoot makes it a very attractive drill target. Previous mining ceased in mineralisation with intercepts including:

• 16m @ 3.8g/t Au (MBRC0035 from 56m)

• o 18m @ 4.9g/t Au (MBRC0038 from 54m)

Newly identified Intercepts

A detailed review of historical exploration reports over the Bottle Dump deposit has identified a number of high-grade drill results that have not been previously announced. Significantly, these results indicate that there is strong potential for the high-grade Bottle Dump mineralisation to be open along plunge to the east, and the west (Figures 6 to 9). Significant results include:

• 30m @ 3.7g/t Au (BTD100 from 87m)

• 13m @ 8.5g/t Au (BT128 from 15m); including 4m @ 25.3g/t (from 90m)

• 8m @ 10.3g/t Au (BT123 from 88m); including 4m @ 18.0g/t (from 91m)

• 2m @ 15.8/t Au (BT107 from 81m); including 2m @ 15.8g/t (from 81m)

• 8m @ 6.3g/t Au (BT138 from 80m); including 3m @ 13.6g/t (from 85m)

• 12m @ 4.5g/t Au (BT108 from 69m); including 4m @ 9.1g/t (from 71m)

As shown in the long and cross sections (Figures 6 to 9) these results indicate strong potential for high-grade plunge extensions of the Bottle Dump deposit. A detailed review of the exploration along the eastern trend from Bottle Dump indicates that historical drilling was typically targeted to a vertical depth of approximately 40m; leaving significant potential for mineralisation to be targeted beneath any depleted weathered profile.

6

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [533 x 202] intentionally omitted <==

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

NEW INTERCEPTS
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 6: Long-section of Bottle Dump showing the open high-grade plunges

==> picture [464 x 383] intentionally omitted <==

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

CROSS SECTION A
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 7: Cross Section A from Bottle Dump

7

==> picture [167 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [405 x 672] intentionally omitted <==

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

CROSS SECTION B
CROSS SECTION C
----- End of picture text -----

Figures 8 & 9: Cross sections B & C from Bottle Dump showing the high-grade plunges and intercepts

8

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

WORK PROGRAMS PLANNED

Odyssey plans to test the significant potential for the discovery of BIF-related lode and vein-hosted gold mineralisation and other potential for additional lateritic deposits at both Tuckanarra and Stakewell.

The Company plans to utilise modern exploration techniques and deeper drilling to target mineralisation along trend, and down plunge of known deposits (like methods used in the recent success of Musgrave Minerals Limited and Spectrum Metals Limited), as well as using recently re-processed detailed magnetics to target greenfield opportunities. Initial investigations also indicate that high-grade mineralisation is associated with pyrrhotite enrichment in the BIF units and that downhole EM will be a credible targeting tool.

Work underway to develop the targeting profile for the Tuckanarra and Stakewell projects in the near term includes:

• continued confirmation of the drill database through on-ground work and reference to historical reports;

• aquisition of high-resolution magnetics in the area;

• potential sub audio magnetics ground geophysical survey;

• an updated 3D structural targeting model of the region;

• re-interpretation of soil sampling data including potential infill lines;

• a target ranking exercise over the area; and

• re-logging and re-assaying of drill core and samples where appropriate.

Odyssey Gold’s maiden drill program is scheduled to commence in Q1 2021, with planning, contract tendering and permitting well advanced.

9

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT

The information in this announcement that relates to historical exploration results from Bottle Dump is based on information reviewed by Mr Neil Inwood of Sigma Resources Consulting, who is a consultant to Odyssey Gold Limited and is an accurate representation of the available data and information available relating to the reported historical exploration results. Mr Inwood is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and a proposed holder of incentive options and ordinary shares in Odyssey Gold Limited. Mr Inwood has sufficient experience that is relevant to the styles of mineralisation and types of deposit under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (JORC Code). Based on the available information relating to the historical exploration results reported in this announcement, Mr Inwood consents to the inclusion in the announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this announcement that relates to historical exploration results from the broader Tuckanarra Project was extracted from our ASX announcements dated 22 October 2020 and 27 November 2020 which are available to view on the Company’s website at www.odysseygold.com.au. Odyssey confirms that: a) it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original ASX announcements; b) all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning any Mineral Resources, Exploration Targets, Production Targets, and related forecast financial information derived from Production Targets included in the original ASX announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed; and c) the form and context in which the relevant Competent Persons’ findings are presented in this report have not been materially modified from the original ASX announcements.

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

Statements regarding plans with respect to Odyssey’s project are forward-looking statements. There can be no assurance that the Company’s plans for development of its projects will proceed as currently expected. These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of the Company, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. The Company makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking statements made in this announcement, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that announcement.

This ASX Announcement has been approved in accordance with the Company’s published continuous disclosure policy and authorised for release by the Executive Director.

10

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 1 - DRILL INTERCEPT TABLE

Hole ID	Type	Easting	Northing	RL	Max. Depth	Az	Dip	From	Length (m)	Au (g/t)
BDEW002	RC/Diamond	611,619	6,999,973	525	72	18	-90	46	13	6.81
BT102	RC	611,434	7,000,036	517	75	18	-60	34	3	1.68
BT106	RC	611,488	7,000,009	517	60	18	-60	18	2	5.13
BT107	RC	611,480	6,999,991	517	85	18	-60	71	3	1.92
including								81	2	15.77
BT108	RC	611,498	6,999,983	519	90	18	-60	69	12	4.53
including								71	4	9.11
BT109	RC	611,491	6,999,964	519	110	18	-60	91	10	2.99
BT110	RC	611,518	6,999,976	519	90	18	-60	66	3	1.35
including								73	9	3.22
BT111	RC	611,514	6,999,966	519	106	18	-60	77	5	1.04
including								93	3	3.54
BT112	RC	611,510	6,999,957	519	112	18	-60	91	7	1.61
including								104	5	2.83
BT113	RC	611,535	6,999,968	520	90	18	-60	67	10	4.10
including								69	4	9.11
BT114	RC	611,532	6,999,959	520	101	18	-60	80	2	0.55
including								87	11	2.18
BT115	RC	611,528	6,999,949	520	110	18	-60	88	19	1.43
BT116	RC	611,554	6,999,960	522	78	18	-60	64	6	2.45
BT117	RC	611,551	6,999,951	522	92	18	-60	77	12	1.78
BT118A	RC	611,545	6,999,942	522	100	18	-60	86	6	2.13
BT119	RC	611,576	6,999,961	522	65	18	-60	56	7	2.16
BT120	RC	611,569	6,999,943	522	85	18	-60	77	5	1.97
BT121	RC	611,599	6,999,964	523	45	18	-60	38	2	0.58
BT123	RC	611,583	6,999,927	523	100	18	-60	88	8	10.33
including								91	4	17.99
BT126	RC	611,616	6,999,952	524	65	18	-60	46	3	0.68
BT127	RC	611,608	6,999,933	524	85	18	-60	68	2	1.13
including								78	4	3.19
BT128	RC	611,599	6,999,915	524	100	18	-60	87	13	8.47
including								90	4	25.32
BT134	RC	611,484	7,000,001	517	75	18	-60	58	2	1.12
BT135	RC	611,573	6,999,953	522	77	18	-60	71	6	5.55
including								73	2	12.39
BT136	RC	611,562	6,999,936	522	108	18	-60	90	3	2.03
including								97	3	4.23
BT137	RC	611,588	6,999,937	523	90	18	-60	72	9	4.52
BT138	RC	611,604	6,999,924	524	120	18	-60	80	8	6.31
including								85	3	13.61
BT139	RC	611,595	6,999,955	523	60	18	-60	49	1	12.45
BTD100	RC	611,531	7,000,062	520	120.5	198	-55	80	30	3.66
BTD101	RC	611,495	6,999,974	517	118.6	18	-60	83	11	4.41

11

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

APPENDIX 2 - JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	Drilling results pertaining to the Project have been completed by several previous explorers in the region. Sampling methods employed in the projects assessed include soil sampling and rock-chip sampling, as well as drilling (various methods including RC, diamond and RAB). Historical sampling has been documented in old reports and government records (available on WAMEX) with key reports reviewed by the Competent Person. The location and tenor of historical drill records cannot be absolutely verified until key drill holes have been reviewed and collars located on the ground. It is uncertain as to how much key exploration information will be re- verifiable past the current exploration reports. The sampling has been carried out on air core (AC), Rotary Air Blast (RAB), Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond (DDH) drilling techniques at the Tuckanarra Project (Project). A total of 408 AC (11,783m), 1,912 RAB (67,777m), 766 RC (35,505m) and 19 DDH (1,460m) holes are present in the Tuckanarra Project database. The new historical data reported in the current announcement has been collected from original company reports and data which were submitted to DMIRS and available on the WAMEX website. A search of WAMEX reports located additional drilling at the Bottle Dump and Maybelle deposits that was not previously compiled into the database. In 1994-5 Gold Mines Australia (GMA) drilled 143 RAB holes for 7,535m. 42 RC holes for 1699m and 3 DDH for 198m which have now been included in the company’s database. Records for newly acquired historical data have been compiled from reports obtained on the WAMEX website and checked against either reported laboratory lab results or compiled logs, with cross-checks against historical sections. The exploration data is considered suitable for current reporting purposes and exploration targeting, however further work would be required to verify the data suitable for inclusion in potential future project reviews of resource estimations.
	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representation and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.	The collar locations of the GMA drill holes were surveyed on a local grid. Sampling was carried out under the GMA protocols and QAQC procedures which are understood to have been industry standard practice at the time. Unknown for historical drilling except what was recorded in the WAMEX reports. See further details below.
	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	The GMA RC holes samples were collected at 1m intervals through a rig mounted riffle splitter. The diameter of the Diamond holes was NQ. Core was marked up and cut along the orientation line with a diamond saw. The GMA RAB samples were collected by scoop at 4 meter intervals. Samples were assayed by Aqua regia digest with AAS finish.

12

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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).	GMA Diamond drill holes were completed with NQ standard tube and drill core was cut into halves, with one half core submitted for analysis at intervals on geological intervals.
Drill sample recovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	The majority of samples were understood to be dry. Ground water ingress occurred in some holes at rod change, but overall the holes were kept dry. Typically, drilling operators ensured water was lifted from the face of the hole at each rod change to ensure water did not interfere with drilling and to make sure samples were collected dry. RC recoveries were visually estimated, and recoveries recorded in the log as a percentage. Recovery of the samples was good, generally estimated to be full, except for some sample loss at the collar of the hole. Diamond recoveries were logged at approximately +95%. Further investigation is required to assess core recovery from available historical drill holes; and will be undertaken after acquisition of the project if core is available.
	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.	Not recorded for 1995 GMA drilling.
	Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	No relationship between recovery and grade has been identified to date in the data review stage.
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.	Records available indicate that logging completed by geologists, formerly employed by various companies working on the Project, is at a level sufficient to generate maps, plans and sections found in company reports. All chips and drill core were geologically logged by GMA geologists and independent geologists, using the company geological logging legend and protocol.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.	Logging of RAB and RC chips and drill core records lithology, mineralogy, mineralisation, weathering, colour and other features of the samples.
	The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged	All holes were logged in full.
Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	No original records of subsampling have been found for drilling; it is possible that this information can be sourced in the future. Historical drill core was understood to have been sawn into halves using a core saw. Half core was understood to have been used for assay analysis and multi element geochemistry. The remaining half of the drill core was stored.
	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.	One-metre RC drill samples were collected below a rig mounted cyclone and riffle splitter, RAB samples were collected by scoop from sample piles.
	For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.	GMA RC samples were sent to the GMA Reedy Laboratory and mineralized samples were sent to the GMA Laboratory in Perth for analysis by Aqua Regia digest/AAS.finish. Checks of mineralized samples were carried out at the GMA laboratory using the AAS method and Fire Assay. The diamond core (NQ) was logged by company geologists and mineralised intervals were marked up for cutting. The core was then cut along the orientation line using a diamond saw and sent to the GMA Perth lab for analysis. The samples were then crushed and split with the reject stored for use in metallurgical testwork. The split samples were then pulverised and then assayed using aqua regia digest with AAS finish. All holes in the GMA RAB program were sampled at 4m intervals using a scoop with intersections over 0.20 g/t Au being resampled at one meter intervals. These samples were analysed at the GMA Reedy laboratory and at the Amdel laboratory in Meekatharra using Aqua Regia digest with an AAS finish.

13

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub- sampling stages to maximise representation of samples.	No detailed records of assaying QAQC is available and it is not possible to comment absolutely on the quality of assaying work undertaken. The work carried out by previous workers used reputable assay laboratories within the region and it is reasonable to assume that the assay results stated in the exploration reports are indicative of mineralisation styles in the area. It is possible that further information can be sourced in the future. Checks of mineralised samples were also carried out by the GMA laboratory using the Au-3 AAS method and the Au-6 fire assay method.
	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.	The technique to collect the one meter samples was via a rig mounted riffle splitter.
	Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	Sample sizes are considered appropriate to give an indication of mineralisation given the particle
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.	GMA RC samples were sent to the GMA Reedy Laboratory and mineralized samples were sent to the GMA Laboratory in Perth for analysis by Aqua Regia digest /AAS.finish. The core was sent to the GMA Perth lab for analysis. The samples were then crushed and split with the reject stored for use in metallurgical testwork. The split samples were then pulverised and then assayed using aqua regia digest with AAS finish. All holes in the GMA RAB program were sampled at 4m intervals using a scoop with intersections over 0.20 g/t Au being resampled at one meter intervals. These samples were analysed at the GMA Reedy laboratory and at the Amdel laboratory in Meekatharra using Aqua Regia digest with an AAS finish.
	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.	The author is not aware of any geophysical tools used in this program.
	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.	The QA/QC protocols were not recorded but checks of mineralised samples were also carried out by the GMA laboratory using the Au-3 AAS method and the Au-6 fire assay method.
Verification of sampling and assaying	The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.	Significant assay results have been cross-checked to original company reports available on the WAMEX website. No material errors have been identified to date. Validation work will continue during the early stages of the project. Several drillhole collars have been identified in the field which confirm the collar positions to a reasonable to moderate level of accuracy at this early stage. At the prospect scale the quality of data is currently considered acceptable for exploration purposes. Further investigation and validation will be undertaken as work programs progress.
	The use of twinned holes.	There have been no recent twin holes drilled at the Project.
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	The author is unaware of how the AC and RC data was captured in the field, but it is noted that original logs are included in multiple previous historical exploration reports – these logs are handwritten onto pre-formed sheets. Diamond core logs were by hand and transferred electronically into excel spreadsheets and imported into an Access database.
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	No assay data was adjusted.
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.	All GMA hole collar locations were surveyed by a registered Surveyor on a local grid. It is unknown what group managed the survey function. Field work in 2020 will focus on picking up drill collars in the field for verification purposes.

14

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Specification of the grid system used.	The project currently uses the MGA94, Zone 50 grid system. Previous workers also used AMG Zone 50.
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	The site topographic surveys including the pit surveys match well with the drill hole collars. Detailed aerial photography over the region has aided on locating drillhole collars.
Data spacing and distribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	The data density is sufficient to test the style of mineralisation at the Project with respect to exploration targeting. Data spacing range from 100’s meters to sub 20m.
	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.	Further work is required at the Project to test for extension of mineralisation potential and verification of historical collars. Some drilling is on a spacing which is sufficient to test the grade continuity of mineralisation for this style of mineralisation. The current data set is considered potentially appropriate for use in a future Mineral Resource providing further drilling is completed.
	Whether sample compositing has been applied.	GMA RC samples collected were one meter composites and RAB samples at 4m intervals using a scoop with intersections over 0.20 g/t Au being resampled at one meter intervals. GMA diamond core was understood to have been cut and sampled to geological intervals.
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.	It is considered the orientation of the bulk of the drilling and sampling suitably captures the dominant “structure” of the style of mineralisation at Tuckanarra.
	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.	This is not currently considered material. The bulk of the intercepts appear to be orthogonal to the mineralisation +/- 25 degrees unless otherwise stated in the intercepts table. Further work will be undertaken to analyse this in the future as exploration works progress.
Sample security	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Unknown for GMA and historical data.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	Sampling and assaying techniques are considered to have been of industry-standard at the time. No specific audits or reviews have been reviewed as part of this review.

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 Tuckanarra Project comprises of two Exploration Licences (E20/782-783), one Mining Licence (M202/527), three Prospecting Licences. All licences are currently in the name of Monument Murchison Pty Ltd and will be transferred into the name of Odyssey Gold Limited once the transaction has been completed. The Company will also acquire four adjacent applications for Prospecting Licences from a local prospector.
	The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	The tenement package is understood to be in good standing with the WA DMIRS.
Exploration done by other parties	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	Refer to the body of the report.
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	The Project area is located within the Meekatharra-Wydgee Greenstone belt within the north-eastern Murchison Domain. The majority of greenstones within the Meekatharra-Wydgee belt have been stratigraphically placed within the Polelle Group and the Norie Group of the Murchison Supergroup. The Project area covers Archean basement rocks assigned to the 2815-2805 Ma basal Norie group of the Murchison Supergroup, which covers the eastern margin of the Meekatharra-Wydgee greenstone belt. The Norie group comprises a thick succession of pillowed and massive tholeiitic basalts of the Muroulli Basalt, and conformably overlying and mafic schist and felsic volcanoclastics with interbedded BIF and felsic volcanic rocks of the Yaloginda Formation (Van Kranendonket al,2013). Theserocks arefolded around the

15

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		south- plunging Besley Anticline. Adjacent to these rocks are the mafic sequences of the Meekatharra Formation (Polelle Group). Granitoids in the Project area comprise of the Jungar Suite and Annean Supersuite to the east and the Munarra Monzogranite of the Tuckanarra Suite to the west. The Jungar Suite comprises of foliated to strongly sheared K-feldspar-porphyritic monzogranites. These rocks are characterized by strong shear fabrics that suggest they may have been emplaced during, or just before, shearing. The Annean Supersuite includes hornblende tonalite and monzogranitic rocks. The Tuckanarra Suite consists of strongly foliated and locally magmatically layered granodiorite to monzogranitic rocks. The Project is situated within the ‘Meekatharra structural zone’, a major regional, NE-trending shear dominated zone, about 50 to 60km wide, stretching from Meekatharra through the Cue region as far south as Mount Magnet. This major shear zone is dominated by north and northeast-trending folds and shears (e.g. Kohinoor shear). The Mt Magnet fault is the major east- bounding structure of the Meekatharra structural zone. The mineralised zones of the Tuckanarra Gold Project are located in the Tuckanarra greenstone belt comprising a series of mafic and inter-banded mafic and iron formations, with a variable component of clastic sediments, (greywackes and minor shales). The sequence is folded into a south‐westerly plunging anticline with a well-developed axial plane cleavage and numerous fractures, bedding parallel faults and shears. The belt extends northwards to Stake Well and east towards the Reedys mining centre. The area has four large open pits, extensive minor gold workings, and prospecting pits principally associated with mafic lithologies and Altered Ferruginous Transitional (AFT) and Altered Ferruginous Fresh (AFF) material which were originally banded iron formations. The magnetite content within the AFT/AFF’s has been destroyed and predominantly altered to an assemblage of hematite with the relic structure of the banded iron intact. Where mineralised veins intersect major competency contrasts such as high magnesium basalt or AFT/AFF, veining becomes layer parallel resulting in larger deposits such as the Bollard and Cable deposits. A number of styles of gold mineralisation have been identified in the area including: Mineralised Altered Ferruginous Transitional (AFT) and Altered Ferruginous Fresh (AFF) material ± quartz veining (Cable East, Cable Central); Quartz veins ± altered basalts (Cable West, Lucknow, Maybelle, Maybelle North, Miners’ Dream); Gold mineralisation within laterite (Anchor, Bollard, Drogue). Below the base of complete oxidation (approximately 40m) gold mineralisation is commonly seen associated with quartz‐ pyrrhotite veins and pyrrhotite replacement of the host rocks. Prospective models for the discovery of additional gold deposits in the area are related to the intersection of shear zones with prospective lithologies.

16

==> picture [167 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
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: ▪ easting and northing of the drill hole collar ▪ elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar ▪ dip and azimuth of the hole ▪ down hole length and interception depth ▪ 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.	Refer to Appendix 2 for the significant intersections of the Project. Material drill results have been included in the body of the report, which is considered appropriate for a brownfields exploration project of this type. Owing to the size of the project holdings, summary plan and long-section diagrams have also been included. The company is still in the process of compiling exploration information over the project areas and intends to provide additional updates in the future on a project basis
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.	Due to the vast amounts of drilling, significant intercepts are reported as down-hole length-weighted averages of grades above approximately 0.5 g/t Au and above a nominal length of 2m. No top cuts have been applied to the reporting of the assay results.
	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.	Higher grade intervals are included in the reported grade intervals; and have also been split out on a case-by-case basis where relevant.
	The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.	No metal equivalent values are used.
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 bulk of the exploration drilling was conducted so that results would be close to orthogonal to the mineralisation as understood at the time; however the true relationship to the mineralisation is not accurately determined.
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.	Refer to Figures 7-14 in the body of this announcement and Appendix 2 – Table 1.
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.	Balanced reporting has been used. It is noted that the soils data is still being collated, but the author considers the use of soils data appropriate for reporting broad-scale anomalies for general targeting; as has been undertaken on this project by previous companies under JORC 2004. The exploration results should be considered indicative of mineralisation styles in the region. Exploration results stated indicated highlights of the drilling and are not meant to represent prospect scale mineralisation. As the projects are brownfields exploration targets, and there are large numbers of holes drilled over the region, it is considered appropriate to illustrate mineralised and non-mineralised drill holes by the use of diagrams,with reference to the table ofsignificantintercepts.
Other substantive exploration data	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk	No other meaningful data is required to be presented other than what has been presented in the body of this announcement.

17

==> picture [168 x 36] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary 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.

Work planned to develop the targeting profile for the project in the near future will include reassessment and re-processing of historical hi-resolution magnetics in the area, potential SAM geophysics or ground magnetics, an updated 3D structural targeting model of the region, confirmation of the drill database through on-ground work and referral to company reports, reinterpretation of soils data including potential infill lines; and a target ranking exercise over the area. Target regions are illustrated in figures within the announcement. Additional work in the future will also focus on validating the current drillhole and soils database and QAQC information through validation checks to original company reports, resampling of historical core (if obtainable), identification of collars in the field and twinning of key drillholes.

18