RAIDEN RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2023

Apr 2, 2023

MAIDEN MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE & JORC EXPLORATION TARGET DEFINED FOR MT SHOLL PROJECT

MAIDEN JORC (2012) RESOURCE ESTIMATE ("MRE"):

• 23.4Mt @ 0.60% Ni_Eq1 or 1.54% Cu_Eq1 (at a 0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off) containing;
  • 83.9kt of Ni metal, 93.7kt copper metal and 233,644oz of Pd+Pt+Au
  • Including 5.8Mt @ 0.94% Ni_Eq or 2.48% Cu_Eq (at 0.70% Ni_Eq cut-off)
  • 20.3Mt @ 0.58% Ni_Eq or 1.49% Cu_Eq are constrained within four shallow open pits (at 0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off)
• Indicated resource (10.5Mt), grades significantly higher than inferred resource category providing potential for overall grade increases with infill drilling
• Larger resource of 40.4Mt @ 0.45% Ni_Eq1 or 1.17% Cu_Eq1 containing 183.2kt of Ni metal, 473.0kt copper metal and 300,972oz of Pd+Pt+Au at 0.15% Ni_Eq cut-off
• Mineralisation remains open along strike and at depth across all 4 deposits and is only constrained by current drilling

1Ni_Eq & Cu_Eq = Nickel and Copper equivalent grades (formulas and assumptions can be found in the body of this announcement)

Mr Dusko Ljubojevic, Managing Director of Raiden commented: "This maiden resource is a significant milestone for the Company. We are particularly pleased that the MRE is within the parameters of our initial Exploration Target published in 2022. As a significant amount of mineralisation is near surface, Mt Sholl not only represents the largest resource in the district, but currently is also the only Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide project in the district with open pit potential. At the same time

mineralisation remains open along strike and to depth, which presents the Company with a path to potential resource growth, along with significant geophysical and geochemical targets, which remain untested by drilling to date and form the basis for the revised Exploration Target.

QUICK STATS

ASX Code: RDN DAX Code: YM4

BOARD & MANAGEMENT

Non-Executive Chairman Mr Michael Davy

Managing Director Mr Dusko Ljubojevic

Non-Executive Director Mr Dale Ginn

Non-Executive Director & Company Secretary Ms Kyla Garic

Chief Operating Officer Mr Warrick Clent

ASSET PORTFOLIO SERBIA

Cu, Co & Au (~269km2 )

BULGARIA

Cu, Au & Ag (~409km2 )

AUSTRALIA

Au, Cu, Ni & PGE (~840km2 )

Also, indicated category resources have a significantly higher grades (Ni – 26%; Cu – 29% and Co – 42% higher), in relation to inferred resources, which may provide the potential for overall grade increase as inferred resources are converted to indicated with future infill drilling.

On the basis of the geological modelling, which is based on a large amount of historical and recent drilling, geochemical surveys, magnetic, VTEM and EM geophysical surveys, we were able to define a new JORC Exploration Target which indicates potential for the Mt Sholl project to develop into a strategically significant mineral resource. The project area is also supported by excellent infrastructure, including proximal port facilities.

Management are planning for next value generative steps on Mt Sholl. In parallel, management are actively undertaking further negotiations with third parties in relation to sale or partnerships on the non-core assets in Australia and Europe. These transactions may provide shareholders with passive discovery upside potential and the Company with further funds with which to finance Mt Sholl operations."

JORC EXPLORATION TARGET:

• 80–150Mt at a grade range of 0.45% - 0.75% Ni_Eq or 1.15% - 1.95% Cu_Eq*

*The potential quantity and grade of this exploration target is conceptual in nature, there is currently insufficient exploration completed to support a mineral resource of this size and it is uncertain whether continued exploration will result in the estimation of a JORC resource. The Exploration Target has been prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).

• MRE is open across all 4 deposits along strike and at depth, and the Exploration Target represents the potential extensions of these deposits
• JORC Exploration Target represents the potential extensions & repetition of these deposits
• JORC Exploration Target is based on geological modelling of the host units, historical magnetic, VTEM and EM surveys and defined geochemical anomalies across the project area
• Volumetrically, only 6% of the modelled host unit / contact zone has been drill tested to date – high potential for further mineralisation through future exploration drilling
• Targets permitted for drilling access and allow for a near-term extensional drill campaign 1Ni_Eq & Cu_Eq = Nickel and Copper equivalent grades (formulas and assumptions can be found in the body of this announcement)

Raiden Resources Limited (ASX: RDN DAX: YM4) ("Raiden" or "the Company") is pleased to report on the maiden JORC (2012) compliant Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for the Mt Sholl Nickel-Copper-PGE project.

The Mt Sholl resource is estimated to contain 23.4Mt @ 0.36% Ni, 0.40% Cu and 0.31 g/t 3E (0.60% Ni_Eq/1.54% Cu_Eq) for 83.9kt of contained Nickel, 93.7kt of contained Copper and 233,644oz of PGE's, at a cut-off grade of 0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off for open pit resources and at 0.5% Ni_Eq for underground resources (JORC 2012),

The above reported resource sits within a larger lower grade resource that at a 0.15% Ni_Eq cut-off contains:

40.4Mt @ 0.28% Ni, 0.28% Cu and 0.23 g/t 3E (0.45% Ni_Eq or 1.17% Cu_Eq) for 183.2kt of contained Nickel, 473.0kt of contained Copper and 300,972 oz of PGE's

and a further

JORC Exploration Target of 80 – 150Mt at a grade range of 0.45% - 0.75% Ni_Eq or 1.15% - 1.95% Cu_Eq*

*The potential quantity and grade of this exploration target is conceptual in nature, there is currently insufficient exploration completed to support a mineral resource of this size and it is uncertain whether continued exploration will result in the estimation of a JORC resource. The Exploration Target has been prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).

Classification	TonnesMt	Ni%	Cu%	Coppm	3E1g/t	Ni Metalkt	Cu Metalkt	3E(Pd, Pt,Au)oz
Open Pit
Indicated	10.5	0.39	0.45	134	0.32	41.0	47.3	108,031
Inferred	9.8	0.29	0.32	78	0.32	28.4	31.3	100,715
Total	20.3	0.34	0.39	107	0.32	69.34	78.6	208,745
Underground
Inferred	3.1	0.48	0.47	57	0.25	14.9	14.6	24,898

Table 1: Mt Sholl Mineral Resource Estimate by classification reported above a 0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off for open pit resources and at 0.5% Ni_Eq for underground resources

Mt Sholl Ni-Cu-PGE Project Overview

The consolidated tenements are located 22km south of Karratha and 10km northeast of the mothballed Radio Hill mine in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, covering a total land area of 42km2 (see Figure 1). The project is well positioned in respect to infrastructure with the Port of Dampier, Karratha International Airport, and grid power, sealed highway and experienced mining support services all available within a 40km radius of the project.

**Figure 1: Mt Sholl Project in relation to key infrastructure and other JORC (2012) Resources in the district2,3,**4

OVERVIEW

The following subsections are provided consistent with ASX Listing Rule 5.8.1, with further information provided in the JORC Code (2012) – Table 1, which is attached to this announcement.

The MRE was completed by Bruce H. van Brunt of BvB Consulting ("BvB") utilising all available drill holes, both recent (Raiden 2022) and historical (previous explorers between 1970 and 2007), to inform the mineral resource estimation. The 2022 diamond drill program by Raiden purposely twinned historic holes, generally drilling at approximately 5m distance from those holes, to verify the accuracy of the historic drill hole data for use within this MRE. All holes were assayed where they intersected mineralisation, and for any internal waste and external lengths for several metres outside the observed visual mineralisation. Drillhole spacing is variable, with near surface drill holes generally spaced 30m to 40m along strike and down dip, and deeper holes spaced approximately 100m from one another. Drill samples were collected at a range of intervals up to 4m. No relationships between hole angles and grade or true thickness of the mineralisation were established.

GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION

The Mt Sholl geologic model, used to constrain Ni-Cu-Co-Pd-Pt-Au-Ag grades in the 2023 Mt Sholl maiden resource calculations, was interpreted from the combination of historic and 2022 Raiden Resources drilling, the geological interpretation from Terra Resources; ground Electro-magnetic data; the Hoatson, et. al. 2006 Type 2A classification of massive and disseminated tholeiitic nickel sulphide deposits, as well as, Company's internal geological modelling.

The Type 2A classification model concept is a lopolith shaped ultramafic intrusion with Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation concentrated at the base of the mafic/ultramafic (dolerite/gabbro/pyroxenite) package contact. The Terra Resources geological interpretation outlines an ultramafic zone, displaced by late faulting, in the shape of a bathtub intruded into a basement of basalt unit. Historic and 2022 drilling confirms the model concept across the A1, B1, B2 and Kudos deposits. Higher grade Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation is concentrated directly above the contact with the basement basalt in a 20-30 metre thick zone, which is overlain by a low-grade mineralisation zone of varying thickness and extent.

Reviewing the Mt Sholl drilling database, Ni-Cu grade zonation and logged lithology clearly distinguish the basement, basal unit and overlaying low-grade mineralisation zones. 3D solids for each of these zones at A1, B1, B2 and Kudos were generated to code geologic domains and constrain the Mt Sholl resource model estimation within.

Figure 2: Mt Sholl project area with mineral resource and pit (0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off) locations

Figure 3: A1 deposit, mineral resource and drilling in relation to the prospective zone (purple) which remains untested by drilling

Page 7 of 45

DRILLING TECHNIQUES

The deposits and prospects have been drilled using Rotary Air Blast (RAB), Air Core (AC), Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond drilling over many campaigns by several companies and currently by Raiden.

Drilling by Raiden has been completed using only diamond drilling techniques. Diamond drill core is predominantly HQ size (63.5mm diameter) from surface to a depth of competent drilling conditions and then NQ2 size (50.6mm diameter) to the final depth. Wireline standard tube drilling techniques have been used throughout. Diamond drilling was undertaken by Raiden with core measured and orientated where appropriate to determine recovery. The diamond drilling recovery has been excellent with very little to no core loss identified.

Exploration Rotary Air Blast (RAB) or Air Core (AC) drilling has not been used in the MRE.

SAMPLING AND SUB-SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

For previous companies the methods for splitting the drill samples and relevant quality control procedures are unknown. It is also unknown if duplicate splits were collected or analysed. The sample procedures followed by these historic operators are assumed to be in line with industry standards at the time.

Diamond drilling completed by Raiden Resources on the Mt Sholl tenements has been ½ or ¼ core (for NQ) or ½ or ¼ core (for HQ) sampled. The diamond core was consistently sampled with the left-hand side of the HQ and NQ holes sampled, while for duplicate core samples the left-hand side of the left-hand half was sampled.

Field QAQC procedures included the insertion of Certified Reference Materials (CRM or standards) and blanks at the rates 1:25 sample to assess the assaying accuracy of the external laboratories, in this case the ALS Geochemistry laboratory in Perth. Additionally, as part of the field QAQC procedures, field duplicates accounting for 2% of the samples are included for analysis.

A sample size of between 3 and 5 kg was collected. This size is considered appropriate, and representative of the material being sampled given the width and continuity of the intersections.

As stated, the current QAQC protocols include the analysis of field duplicates and the insertion of appropriate commercial standards and blank samples. Based on statistical analysis of these results, there is no evidence to suggest the samples are not representative.

SAMPLE ANALYSIS METHODS

Laboratory procedures and assaying by previous companies are considered appropriate for the type of sample, but laboratory quality control procedures are not available for the samples.

Raiden's diamond drilling samples were submitted to ALS Geochemistry laboratory in Perth for 33-element Four Acid Multi-Element Analysis ICP-AES (ME-ICP61). The Pt, Pd, Au analysis was carried out via lead fire assay with an ICP-AES technique finish (PGM-ICP24) with 50g lead collection fire assay in new pots.

Fire Assay is an industry-standard for Pt, Pd, Au and it is considered appropriate as a firstpass analysis.

Standards, blanks, and duplicates have been used by the laboratory for QAQC.

No laboratory audits were undertaken.

ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY

The Mt Sholl mineral resource estimate was completed by Bruce H. van Brunt, FAusIMM, on behalf of Raiden. As Competent Person (CP) he considers the estimate to be suitable to support disclosure of mineral resources for the project.

The mineral resource estimate comprises a single block model incorporating the A1, B1, B2 and Kudos deposits. Parent blocks are 10m x 10m x 5m in x, y, z respectively and subblocks as small as 1m x 1m x1m were used to honour domain boundaries.

Four domains were modelled through the deposits, an upper barren zone (Zone1), a locally extensive low-grade zone (Zone2), the Basal primary mineralised zone and the essentially barren basement. Three-dimensional solids were modelled in Vulcan for each hard domain.

Ni-Cu-Co-PGE grades were estimated into the Basal and Zone2 units. At A1, B1 and B2, ordinary kriging of 1m composites weighted by variograms for Ni and Cu. At Kudos, inverse distance weighting squared was applied to 1m composites. Co was estimated along with Ni in all deposits, PGE and silver were estimated with Cu.

Capping of grades or limiting search distance based on grade was applied as necessary to mitigate the possibility of over estimation of grades. Swath plots of Ni and Cu composite vs block grades and visual verification were used to validate the estimates.

MATERIAL MODIFYING FACTORS

The following modifying factors were considered during preparation of the MRE:

• The Project is located in a mature mining district with numerous previous and existing mining activities in various commodities, including mining of nickel-copper-cobalt deposits at the Radio Hill deposit, which is located 11 kilometres south of the Companies project area.
• The infrastructure is comprehensive and mature for servicing the mining industry, including road access through the project area; proximal power infrastructure, as well as a well-established road network leading to the nearby port of Dampier.
• The nickel, copper, and PGE throughout the Mt Sholl deposits are sufficiently high to potentially provide material to feed to a processing facility. The reporting cut-off grade adopted is considered reasonable for an open-pit operation and similar to peer openpit nickel mines in the region and across other operations worldwide with similar geological characteristics.
• Mining dilution and/or ore loss factors were not applied as part of the MRE. Mining and development studies for the Project are currently in the planning phase.
• There are no known legal, social, or environmental constraints at the Project that would prevent extraction of the resource.

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE

The Mineral Resource has been classified as Indicated and Inferred based on the guidelines specified in the JORC Code (2012). The classification level is based upon assessment of the geological understanding of the Mt Sholl Deposits, geological and mineralisation continuity, drillhole spacing, QC results, search and interpolation parameters, and analysis of available density information.

The Mt Sholl Deposits show good continuity of mineralisation within well-defined geological constraints.

Drill holes are located at a nominal spacing of 40m by 40m. The drill spacing is sufficient to allow the geology and mineralisation zones to be modelled into coherent solids for each domain. Reasonable consistency is evident in the orientation, thickness and grades of the mineralised zones.

The Mineral Resource at A1, B1 and B2 is classified as Indicated where, in the CP's opinion, sufficient data exists to assume geological and mineralisation continuity. The Indicated

classification generally represents areas of the primary mineralisation zone with 40m x 40m drill hole spacing.

The Mineral Resource is classified as Inferred where there is sufficient evidence to imply, but not verify geological and grade continuity. The Inferred blocks are generally around the periphery and depth extent of the major mineralisation domains and in smaller domains with limited samples. The Inferred classification generally represents areas with greater than 50m by 50m drill hole spacing. All of the Kudos resource is reported as Inferred, as is all of the underground resource.

The CP is not aware of any environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors that could materially affect the Mineral Resource estimate.

Figure 5: B2 pits (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the west

Figure 6: Cross-section B2 pit (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the north

Figure 7: Cross-section B1 pit (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the south

Figure 8: Long-section B1 pit (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the northwest

Figure 9: A1 pit (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the southeast

Figure 10: Kudos pit (at 0.35%Ni_Eq cut-off) and mineralisation – view to the south

The MRE is current to 30 March 2023 and reported by classification in Table 2.

Table 2: Mt Sholl Mineral Resource Estimate by classification reported above a 0.35% Ni_Eq cut-off for open pit resources and at 0.5% Ni_Eq for underground resources

Classification	TonnesMt	Ni%	Cu%	Coppm	3E1g/t	Ni Metalkt	Cu Metalkt	3E(Pd, Pt, Au)oz
Open Pit
Indicated	10.5	0.39	0.45	134	0.32	41.0	47.3	108,031
Inferred	9.8	0.29	0.32	78	0.32	28.4	31.3	100,715
Total	20.3	0.34	0.39	107	0.32	69.34	78.6	208,745
Underground
Inferred	3.1	0.48	0.47	57	0.25	14.9	14.6	24,898

Notes:

• Mineral Resources are reported in accordance with the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (The Joint Ore Reserves Committee Code –JORC 2012 Edition).
• Data is reported to significant figures and differences may occur due to rounding.
• Mineral Resources have been reported above a cut-off grade of 0.35 % Nickel equivalent for open pit resources and above 0.5% Nickel equivalent for underground resources.
• Bulk densities in the Basal unit are 3.06 and in Zone2 are 2.91. These figures represent averages of the values collected in the respective domains from the 2022 drill program.
• The Ni_Eq calculation represents total metal value for each metal summed and expressed in equivalent nickel grade and tonnes. Commodity prices assumed in the calculation are noted below as is the formula used to calculate Ni_Eq.

By definition, a Mineral Resource must have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. For the Mt Sholl project, the requirements for reasonable extraction have been met by reporting blocks above the preliminary open pit mining surface that account for mining costs, processing costs, overhead costs and pit slope angles. The reported underground resource are those blocks adjacent to the pit shell, occurring in a mass considered potentially mineable and above the cut-off grade.

Parameter	Unit	Value
Overall pit slope angle	Degrees	55o at B2, 50o atA1, B1 and Kudos
Mining Cost	US$/t mined	3.45
Incremental mining cost	US$/t mined/ 5m depth	0.01
Processing cost	US$/t processed	12.00
G&A cost	US$/t processed	2.50

Table 3: Pit Optimisation Assumptions

Price assumptions used to inform the calculation of equivalent nickel grade to report the MRE:

Nickel price/lb = US$13.30	Copper price/lb = US$4.20	Cobalt price/lb = US$22.22
Silver price/oz = US$23.60	Gold price/oz = US$1,900.00	Platinum price/oz = US$1010

Palladium price / oz = US$1,565

The reporting pit shell for the reported 23.4Mt @ 0.60% Ni_Eq represents the revenue factor 0.7 shell. The above spot commodity pricing does not reflect the revenue factor pricing used in the pit optimisation.

Nickel and Copper Equivalent (Ni_Eq & Cu_Eq) Formulas

Ni_Eq values were calculated from the estimated element grades and assumed commodity prices (in body of the announcement above) along with element recoveries based on historic flotation processes at Radio Hill, limited historic metallurgical test work, including recovery information, completed on B2 by MetPlant Engineering Services Pty Ltd as part of the Fox Resources Ltd. Feasibility Study on the B2 deposit completed in 2007, and similar Ni-Cu_Co_PGE projects producing two concentrates from flotation such as the recoveries of Cu-Ni-Co-Zn-Pd-Pt-Au from the PolyMet Mining Corp. layered mafic NorthMet Deposit located in northern Minnesota. Ni recovery curves were extrapolated from the MetPlant Engineering feasibility results across the full range of Ni grades in the model. A similar approach was taken to derive the Cu recovery curve. It is the Company's opinion that all the elements

included in the metal equivalents calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold . However, it is noted that at this stage the company has only limited mineralogical and metallurgical data on the mineralisation at Mt Sholl and additional test work will be a priority beginning in Q1 2023.

• Recovery assumptions used:
  • Nickel recovery = (0.47151-0.06154*(Ni % grade) 2+0.40033* Ni % grade) with recoveries capped at 85% above 1.15% Ni
  • Copper recovery = (0.6-0.06154*(Cu% grade) 2+0.40033*Cu% grade) with recoveries capped at 85% above 0.70% Cu.
  • Cobalt recovery = 0.36%
  • Silver recovery = 0.60%
  • Gold recovery = 0.73%
  • Palladium recovery = 0.83%
  • Platinum recovery = 0.85%
• Nickel KV calculations:
  • CuKV = (cu_price * 22.04622 * cu_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
  • CoKV = (co_price /31.1035/14.58*co_rec)/(ni_price*22.04622* recovery_ni_variable)
  • AgKV = (ag_price / 31.1035 * ag_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
  • AuKV = (au_price / 31.1035 * au_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
  • PdKV = (pd_price / 31.1035 * pd_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
  • PtKV = (pt_price / 31.1035 * pt_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
• Nickel Equivalent Formula
  • Ni_Eq = (Ni + Cu*CuKV + Co*CoKV + Ag*AgKV + Au*AuKV + Pd*PdKV + Pt*PtKV)
• Copper KV Calculations
  • NiKV = (ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
  • CoKV = (co_price / 453.49 * co_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
  • AgKV = (ag_price / 31.1035 * ag_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
  • AuKV = (au_price / 31.1035 * au_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
  • PdKV = (pd_price / 31.1035 * pd_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
  • PtKV = (pt_price / 31.1035 * pt_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
• Copper Equivalent Formula
  • Cu_Eq = (Cu + Ni * NiKV + Co * CoKV + Ag * AgKV + Au * AuKV + Pd * PdKV + Pt * PtKV)

Grade tonnage tables have been generated for the Mt Sholl Deposits according to classification. The grade tonnage table for the Mineral Resource is shown in Table 4 and 5 and the grade tonnage curves are shown in Figure 9 & 10.

Cut-off(Ni_Eq%)	Ni_EqSpot (%)	Cu_EqSpot (%)	Tonnage	Ni	Cu	Co	Pd	Pt	Au	Ag
0.05	0.4	1.02	41,690,380	0.25	0.24	82	0.15	0.03	0.02	0.61
0.1	0.41	1.06	39,844,827	0.25	0.25	84	0.16	0.03	0.02	0.63
0.15	0.43	1.11	37,334,108	0.26	0.26	87	0.17	0.03	0.03	0.64
0.2	0.46	1.18	33,662,504	0.28	0.28	90	0.18	0.03	0.03	0.66
0.25	0.5	1.28	28,734,183	0.30	0.32	96	0.20	0.04	0.03	0.69
0.3	0.54	1.39	24,220,815	0.32	0.35	102	0.23	0.04	0.03	0.74
0.35	0.58	1.49	20,289,730	0.34	0.39	107	0.24	0.04	0.04	0.76
0.4	0.62	1.6	16,826,941	0.36	0.43	113	0.26	0.05	0.04	0.83
0.45	0.68	1.75	12,914,532	0.40	0.48	121	0.28	0.05	0.04	0.91
0.5	0.74	1.91	10,144,603	0.43	0.53	127	0.30	0.06	0.04	1.01
0.55	0.79	2.04	8,232,309	0.46	0.57	133	0.31	0.06	0.04	1.09
0.6	0.85	2.2	6,525,899	0.50	0.62	143	0.33	0.07	0.04	1.19
0.65	0.89	2.33	5,432,384	0.53	0.65	150	0.35	0.07	0.04	1.26
0.7	0.94	2.48	4,461,138	0.56	0.69	158	0.37	0.07	0.05	1.34
0.75	0.99	2.62	3,684,694	0.59	0.72	166	0.39	0.08	0.05	1.42
0.8	1.03	2.76	3,024,598	0.62	0.76	174	0.41	0.08	0.05	1.52
0.85	1.08	2.93	2,432,489	0.65	0.80	186	0.43	0.09	0.05	1.63
0.9	1.13	3.08	2,003,463	0.68	0.83	196	0.45	0.09	0.05	1.72
0.95	1.17	3.24	1,638,103	0.72	0.85	205	0.47	0.09	0.05	1.79

Table 4: Mt Sholl Open Pit Grade Tonnage Table

Table 5: Mt Sholl Underground Grade Tonnage Table

Cut-off(Ni_Eq%)	Ni_EqSpot (%)	Cu_EqSpot (%)	Tonnage (t)	Ni(%)	Cu (%)	Co(ppm)	Pd (g/t)	Pt (g/t)	Au (g/t)	Ag (g/t)
0.5	0.73	1.89	3,097,720	0.48	0.47	57	0.18	0.04	0.03	0.43
0.55	0.78	2.03	2,480,931	0.52	0.50	57	0.19	0.04	0.04	0.45
0.6	0.82	2.17	2,031,555	0.55	0.52	57	0.21	0.04	0.04	0.48
0.65	0.87	2.32	1,627,127	0.59	0.54	59	0.22	0.05	0.04	0.53
0.7	0.92	2.47	1,298,219	0.64	0.57	66	0.23	0.05	0.04	0.59
0.75	0.98	2.65	1,021,575	0.69	0.58	74	0.23	0.05	0.04	0.66
0.8	1.03	2.83	800,026	0.74	0.60	82	0.24	0.05	0.05	0.66
0.85	1.1	3.03	621,857	0.79	0.63	93	0.25	0.05	0.05	0.66
0.9	1.17	3.30	464,810	0.86	0.64	105	0.27	0.06	0.06	0.65
0.95	1.24	3.55	363,849	0.92	0.67	121	0.28	0.06	0.06	0.70
1	1.29	3.72	309,418	0.96	0.69	129	0.28	0.06	0.06	0.69

Figure 9 : Mt Sholl Oen Pit Grade Tonnage curve

Figure 10 : Mt Sholl Underground Grade Tonnage curve

Mt Sholl 2023 Exploration Target

The Company is also pleased to announce that it has defined an Exploration Target in accordance with JORC 2012 reporting code, ranging from 80 – 150Mt at a grade range of 0.45% - 0.75% Ni_Eq or 1.15% - 1.95% Cu_Eq*

*The potential quantity and grade of this exploration target is conceptual in nature, there is currently insufficient exploration completed to support a mineral resource of this size and it is uncertain whether continued exploration will result in the estimation of a JORC resource. The Exploration Target has been prepared in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).

The Mt Sholl 2023 Exploration Target was estimated over six areas: strike and dip extensions to the A1, B1 B2, and Kudos deposit areas, the southern plunge extensions to the B2 deposit, as well as the prospective northern contact zone between the A1 and B1 deposits.

To put this into context historical drilling has tested only 39% of the potential strike extents of the Mt Sholl Ni-Cu-PGE bearing geological units, 14% of the down-dip potential, and only 6% of the potential overall extent of the deposit.

Utilising a significant amount of historical data, combined with the knowledge gained from the 2022 diamond drill program, the Company identified further zones considered to be highly prospective, along strike and down dip of the existing Mt Sholl MRE, to calculate the 2023 Exploration Target. This work included:

• Utilising statistical assumptions used to define the 2021 Exploration Target, in areas outside of the current MRE, such as:
  • o Drill data was segregated by Domain (A1, B1, B2) and then by assay (Ni, Cu, Co, Pd, Pt, Ag, Au, S) prior to completing univariate statistical analyses. Of the 677 historical drill holes a total of 408 were used to inform the Exploration Target estimation
  • o Histograms and cumulative distribution function (cdf) plots were used to assess the grade population for each element
  • o Inflection points on the cdf plots were identified for each element and multiple grade shells were constructed manually on section to first establish the limit of mineralisation and then control the extent of the higher-grade populations
  • o Grades were estimated using ordinary kriging with search orientations based on variograms calculated for the major elements
  • o The A1 and B1 deposits were modelled using grade shells on Cu, Ni and Pd. B2 was modelled using Cu and Ni shells only. Other elements were estimated along with Ni, Cu or Pd based on correlation
• Modelling of the prospective mineralised geologic units within the Mt Sholl deposits and extrapolating those units along strike/down dip based on:
  • o Historical drilling outside of the deposit areas
  • o Historical surface geochemical Ni, Cu and PGE anomalies
  • o Modelled EM, Magnetic and VTEM targets
  • o A structural analysis of the Mt Sholl intrusion by Company geologists and external consultants

On the basis of this work, the Company modelled the ultramafic units, which host the mineralisation. The units were defined as per interpreted strike/dip information, including faulting offsets and terminations.

The Exploration Target Tonnage was defined by estimating:

• Potential extensions of existing mineralisation, immediately beyond the range of currently defined mineralised bodies (direct extensions);
• Assumptions of further repetitions of mineralised bodies at shallow depths along the full 10.5km strike, where numerous targets are defined by geochemical and geophysical surveys and;
• Depth extensions of the modelled unit and repetitions of mineralised bodies, on the basis of the genetic type of the deposit, including other examples in the same district.

All Ni_Eq and Cu_Eq grades quoted in the Mt Sholl 2023 Exploration Target utilise the formulas and commodity pricing referenced in the body of this announcement.

The Exploration Target meets the requirements of JORC 2012, note 17 on pages 9 and 10 of the JORC Code 2012 edition.

Figure 11 : Mt Sholl 2023 Exploration Target Areas with prospective contact zones overlain on the 2021 Exploration Target

This ASX announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Raiden Resources Limited.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT

DUSKO LJUBOJEVIC Managing Director RAIDEN RESOURCES LIMITED dusko@raidenresources.com.au www.raidenresources.com.au

Page 22 of 45

ASX Announcements referenced in this release

2ASX:ARV 7 May 2019 Nickel and Copper Resources at Ruth Well 3ASX:ARV 21 December 2018 Shallow Nickel-Copper Resource Defined at Radio Hill 4ASX:AZS 8 February 2023 28% Uplift in Mineral Resources at Andover Nickel Project

Competent Person's Statement

The information in this announcement that relates to Mineral Resources and JORC Exploration Target for the Mt Sholl Project is based on and fairly represents information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Bruce H van Brunt, a Competent Person who is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FAusIMM) and a full-time employee of BvB Consulting. Mr Bruce H van Brunt has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the JORC Code. Mr Bruce H van Brunt has provided his prior written consent as to the form and context in which the exploration results and the supporting information are presented in this announcement.

The information in this announcement that relates to exploration results is based on and fairly represents information and supporting documentation, as previously announced by the Company, and has been reviewed and approved by Mr Warrick Clent, a competent person who is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM). Mr Warrick Clent is employed by Raiden Resources Limited. Mr Warrick Clent has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the JORC Code. Mr Warrick Clent has provided his prior written consent as to the form and context in which the exploration results and the supporting information are presented in this announcement.

Mr Warrick Clent assumes responsibility for matters related to Sections 1 and 2 of JORC Table 1, while Mr Bruce H van Brunt assumes responsibility for matters related to Section 3 of JORC Table 1.

Disclaimer:

Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts. Words such as "expect(s)", "feel(s)", "believe(s)", "will", "may", "anticipate(s)", "potential(s)"and similar expressions are intended to identify forwardlooking statements. These statements include, but are not limited to statements regarding future production, resources or reserves and exploration results. All of such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of the Company, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forwardlooking information and statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: (i) those relating to the interpretation of drill results, the geology, grade and continuity of mineral deposits and conclusions of economic evaluations, (ii) risks relating to possible variations in reserves, grade, planned mining dilution and ore loss, or recovery rates and changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, (iii) the potential for delays in exploration or development activities or the completion of feasibility studies, (iv) risks related to commodity price and foreign exchange rate fluctuations, (v) risks related to failure to obtain adequate financing on a timely basis and on acceptable terms or delays in obtaining governmental approvals or in the completion of development or construction activities, and (vi) other risks and uncertainties related to the Company's prospects, properties and business strategy. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance

on these forward-looking statements that speak only as of the date hereof, and the Company does not undertake any obligation to revise and disseminate forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, or to reflect the occurrence of or non-occurrence of any events.

About Raiden Resources

Raiden Resources Limited. (ASX:RDN / DAX:YM4) is a dual listed base metal—gold exploration Company focused on the Mt Sholl nickel-copper-cobalt- PGE project in the Pilbara region of Western Australia project. In addition, the company holds other highly prospective gold projects within the Pilbara region, as well as the emerging and prolific Western Tethyan metallogenic belt in Eastern Europe, where it has established a significant exploration footprint in Serbia and Bulgaria.

The Directors believe that the Company is well positioned to unlock value from this exploration portfolio and deliver a significant mineral discovery.

Tenement	Holder	Grant Date	Expiry	Area	RDN	Comment
					Equity %
E47/3468		12/09/2017	11/09/2022	1Bl	100%
E47/4309		24/07/2020	23/07/2025	2Bl	100%
E47/3339		14/09/2016	13/09/2026	1Bl	80%
E47/3181		13/08/2015	12/08/2025	5Bl	80%
P47/1762	Pilbara Gold	01/09/2016	31/08/2024	139 Ha.	80%
P47/1787	CorporationPty Ltd(Raiden	24/01/2017	23/01/2025	188 Ha.	80%
P47/1788		24/01/2017	23/01/2025	200 Ha.	80%	Covered by the NAC
P47/1789		24/01/2017	23/01/2025	148 Ha.	80%	Heritage Agreement
P47/1790	Resources	30/11/2018	29/11/2022	197 Ha.	80%
P47/1791	Ltd.'s 100%owned	02/08/2018	01/08/2022	177 Ha.	80%
P47/1792	subsidiary)	02/08/2018	01/08/2022	193 Ha.	80%
P47/1793		30/11/2018	29/11/2022	197 Ha.	80%
P47/1794		30/11/2018	29/11/2022	157 Ha.	80%
P47/1795		30/11/2018	29/11/2022	146 Ha.	80%
P47/2024		Application		4.56 Ha.	100%	Not Covered by NACHeritage Agreement

Appendix 1: Tenement Schedule

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

JORC Code 2012 Edition – Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria listed in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Samplingtechniques	•Nature and quality of sampling (egcutchannels, random chips, or specificspecialised industry standardmeasurement tools appropriate to theminerals under investigation, such asdown hole gamma sondes, orhandheld XRF instruments, etc). Theseexamples should not be taken aslimiting the broad meaning ofsampling.•Include reference to measures taken toensure sample representivity and theappropriate calibration of anymeasurement tools or systems used.•Aspects of the determination ofmineralisation that are Material to thePublic Report.•In cases where 'industry standard'work has been done this would berelatively simple (eg 'reversecirculation drilling was used to obtain1 m samples from which 3 kg waspulverised to produce a 30 g charge forfire assay'). In other cases moreexplanationmay be required, such as	•The deposits and prospects have been drilled using Rotary Air Blast (RAB), Air Core(AC), Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond drilling over numerous campaigns byseveral companies and currently by RaidenResources Ltd. Hole spacing from previousdrilling has varied according to company and purpose of drilling. Likewise,the dip andazimuth has varied.•Sample procedures followed by historic operators are assumed to be in line withindustry standards at the time. Current QAQC protocols include the analysisof fieldduplicates and the insertion of appropriate commercial standards and blank samples.Based on statistical analysis of these results, there is no evidence to suggest thesamples are not representative.•Where diamond drilling was undertaken ½ HQ3 or NQ2 core was sampled,while forduplicate samples¼ core was sampled,and samples analysed at ALS Geochemicallaboratory in Perth.

Page 26 of 45

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	where there is coarse gold that hasinherent sampling problems. Unusualcommodities or mineralisation types(eg submarine nodules) may warrantdisclosure of detailed information.
Drillingtechniques	•Drill type (egcore, reverse circulation,open-hole hammer, rotary air blast,auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details(eg core diameter, triple or standardtube, depth of diamond tails, facesampling bit or other type, whethercore is oriented and if so, by whatmethod, etc).	•Reverse circulation, open-hole percussion and diamond -both HQ and NQ sized core.•It is not known if a facesampling hammer was usedby previous companies.
Drill samplerecovery	•Method of recording and assessingcore and chip sample recoveries andresults assessed.•Measures taken to maximise samplerecovery and ensure representativenature of the samples.•Whether a relationship exists betweensample recovery and grade andwhether sample bias may haveoccurred due to preferential loss/gainof fine/coarse material.	•It is not known how or whether sample recovery was monitoredby previouscompanies.•Diamond drilling was undertaken by Raiden Resources Ltd and the core measured andorientated where appropriate to determine recovery.The diamond drilling recoveryhas been excellent with very little to no core loss identified.
Logging	•Whether core and chip samples havebeen geologically and geotechnicallylogged to a level of detail to supportappropriate Mineral Resourceestimation, mining studies and	•Core and chip samples were geologically loggedby previous companies. But it is notknown if core was geotechnically logged.•The historical data has been used for Mineral Resource estimation of the Mt Sholl B2JORC (2004) Mineral Resource estimate completed by RSG Global Consulting Pty Ltd

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	metallurgical studies.•Whether logging is qualitative orquantitative in nature. Core(orcostean, channel, etc) photography.•The total length and percentage of therelevant intersections logged.	("RSG") in 2007, and the Mt Sholl A1 & B1 JORC (2004) Mineral Resource estimatescompleted by Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd ("Snowden") in 2010.•Snowden considered the geological logging as unreliable and geological contacts wereoften interpreted from assay values.•RSG relied on a Fox Resources Ltd supplied interpretation which was reviewed andmodified as required.•All diamond drill holesundertaken by Raiden Resources Ltdhave been logged in full,and the diamond core photographed tray by tray wet and dry
Subsamplingtechniquesand samplepreparation	•If core, whether cut or sawn andwhether quarter, half or all core taken.•If non-core, whether riffled, tubesampled, rotary split, etc and whethersampled wet or dry.•For all sample types, the nature,quality and appropriateness of thesample preparation technique.•Quality control procedures adopted forall sub-sampling stages to maximiserepresentivity of samples.•Measures taken to ensure that thesampling is representative of the insitu material collected, including forinstance results for fieldduplicate/second-half sampling.•Whether sample sizes are appropriateto the grain size of the material beingsampled.	•For previous companies the methods for splitting the drill samples and relevantquality control procedures are unknown. It is not known if duplicate splits werecollected or analysed.Commercial laboratories followed standard procedures forsample preparation to produce sub-samples for analysis.•Diamond drilling completed by Raiden Resources on the Mt Sholl tenements has been½ or ¼ core(for NQ) or ½ or ¼ core (for HQ) sampled.•Field QAQC procedures included the insertion of 2% certified reference 'standards'and 2% field duplicates and 2% 'blanks' for diamond drilling•The diamond core has been consistently sampled with the left-handside of the HQand NQ holes sampled, while for duplicate core samples the left hand side of the lefthand half was sampled•A sample size of between 3 and 5 kg was collected. This size is considered appropriate,and representative of the material being sampledgiven the width and continuity ofthe intersections.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Quality ofassay dataandlaboratorytests	•The nature, quality andappropriateness of the assaying andlaboratory procedures used andwhether the technique is consideredpartial or total.•For geophysical tools, spectrometers,handheld XRF instruments, etc, theparameters used in determining theanalysis including instrument makeand model, reading times, calibrationsfactors applied and their derivation,etc.•Nature of quality control proceduresadopted (eg standards, blanks,duplicates, external laboratory checks)and whether acceptable levels ofaccuracy (ie lack of bias) and precisionhave been established.	•Laboratory procedures and assaying by previous companies are consideredappropriate for the type of sample, but laboratory quality control procedures are notavailable for the samples.•Raiden's diamonddrilling samples are submitted to ALS Geochemistry laboratory inPerth for Four Acid Multi-Element Analysis ICP-AES (ME-ICP61). The Pt, Pd, Auanalysis was carried out via lead fire assay witha ICP-AES finishwith 50g leadcollection fire assay in new pots.•Fire Assay is an industry-standard for Pt, Pd, Auand it is considered appropriateas afirst-pass analysis. For finer analysis on the Platinum Group Metals Raiden willundertake selective analysis using the Nickel Sulphide Fire Assay procedure whereafter dissolution of the pulp with aqua regia, PGM's are determined by ICP-MS.•Certified Reference Materials (CRM or standards) and blanks are inserted at therates 1:25 sample to assess the assaying accuracy of the external laboratories.•Standards, blanks, and duplicates have been used by the laboratory for QAQC.•No laboratory audits were undertaken.
Verificationof samplingandassaying	•The verification of significantintersections by either independent oralternative company personnel.•The use of twinned holes.•Documentation of primary data, dataentry procedures, data verification,data storage (physical and electronic)protocols.•Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	•Significanthistoricalintercepts have not been verified by Raiden or independentpersonnel, as the core is not available, because the data ishistorical, the methods ofdata documentation, verification and storage are not known.•As far as the CP is aware, no adjustments have been made to assay data.•The 2022 diamonddrill program by Raiden purposely twinnedhistoric holes,generally drilling at approximately 5m distance from those holes, to verifytheaccuracy of the historic drill hole data.•Primary data (geological) was collected using previously defined standard codes andthe information uploaded in Excel files on laptop computers by Senior SupervisingGeologists.•All data is received and stored securely in digital format in the Company's database.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		•Final data is rigorously interpreted by Raiden's geoscientific personnel.•All diamond drillholes were surveyed down-hole with north-seeking gyroscopicsurvey instruments by the supervising/senior driller.
Location ofdata points	•Accuracy and quality of surveys usedto locate drill holes (collar and downhole surveys), trenches, mine workingsand other locations used in MineralResource estimation.•Specification of the grid system used.•Quality and adequacy of topographiccontrol.	•The accuracy of the drillhole locations was questioned by Fox Resources Ltd asstated by Snowden in their resource report for the Mt Sholl A1 & B2 MineralResource.•No field verification of previous drill collars has been conducted to date.•Downhole surveys were not recorded for RC holesand generally not recorded forvertical diamond drillholes.•Snowden during their resource modelling for Fox Resources Ltd regarded theabsence of downhole survey information not critical in the overall classification ofthe deposit because a small shift in the position of the ore intersects as a result ofproper downhole survey information will not alter the global resource materially.•Co-ordinates are provided in the Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA94)Zone 50.•Raiden's 2022 drill collars were surveyed by registered surveyor, Land Surveys, onthe 22nd October 2022 using a Leica RTK GNSS rover with absolute point accuraciesof +/-25mm. All data was collected and delivered in GDA94-Zone50 AHD71. A fixedbase station was set up at Dampier 520, a standard survey mark (SSM), to providecorrection, and check shots were made to SSMs Dampier 519 and Dampier 518 toconfirm the accuracy of the RTK GNSS receiver.•Topographic control is based on a LiDAR survey of the area conducted by LandSurveys in November 2022 on behalf of Raiden Resources Ltd. The flight over thearea was performedwith a M300 droneand deliverables included high resolutionimagery, a classified LAS, A DTM and contours at 100mm intervals. All survey datawas captured and supplied on the MGA94 projection,and the height datum isAHD.UAV deliverables providedabsolute point accuracies of +/-75mm.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Dataspacing anddistribution	•Data spacing for reporting ofExploration Results.•Whether the data spacinganddistribution is sufficient to establishthe degree of geological and gradecontinuity appropriate for the MineralResource and Ore Reserve estimationprocedure(s) and classificationsapplied.•Whether sample compositing has beenapplied.	•Drillhole spacing is variable, near surface drill holes generally spaced 30 m to 40 malong strike and down dip, deeper holes spaced approximately 100 m from oneanother.•Drill samples were collected at a range of intervals up to 4m.•Current reporting is for progressive exploration results, and also for JORC (2004)Mineral Resource estimation as specified in the body of the announcement.•Sample compositing over widths of 1 metre, which represents the majority ofsample widths, occurred for the purpose of the Snowden Mt Sholl A1 & B2 JORC(2004) Mineral Resource estimates.•For the RSG Mt Sholl B2 JORC (2004) Mineral Resource estimate 2 metre compositesamples were extracted from the mineralisation model provided by Fox ResourcesLtd to RSG.•No sample compositing has been applied on the current diamond drill program. Inrelation to this announcement, samples have been collected and analysed with amaximum interval of 1m, and a minimum interval of 0.3m, with the majority ofsamples collected at 1m intervals.
Orientationof data inrelation togeologicalstructure	•Whether the orientation of samplingachieves unbiased sampling of possiblestructures and the extent to which thisis known, considering the deposit type.•If the relationship between the drillingorientation and the orientation of keymineralised structures is considered tohave introduced a sampling bias, thisshould be assessed and reported ifmaterial.	•Drillholes were oriented to result in approximately perpendicular penetration of theprojected lodes.•No known sampling bias was introduced because of the drill orientation.
Samplesecurity	•The measures taken to ensure samplesecurity.	•Sample security measures by previous operatorsare not known.•For the current drilling the sample chain of custody is managed by Raiden. All

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		samples were collected in the field at the project site in number-coded calicobags/secure labelled polyweave sacks by Raiden's geological and field personnel. Allsamples were delivered directly to the associated carrier, RGR Road Haulage, byRaiden personnel before being transported to the ALS laboratory in Perth WA forfinal analysis.
Audits orreviews	•The results of any audits or reviews ofsampling techniques and data.	•No reviews or audits have been undertaken.

JORC Code 2012 Edition – Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results.(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineraltenementand landtenurestatus	•Type, reference name/number,location and ownership includingagreements or material issues withthird parties such as joint ventures,partnerships, overriding royalties,native title interests, historical sites,wilderness or national park andenvironmental settings.•The security of the tenure held at thetime of reporting along with anyknown impediments to obtaining alicence to operate in the area.	•Raiden Resources Ltd tenements are located in the City of Karratha,within thePilbara region of Western Australia.•The tenements are held by either by Raiden Resources Ltd 100%, or RaidenResources Ltd 80%/Welcome Exploration Pty Ltd 20%. (see Appendix 1: TenementSchedule for further detail).•Tenements are located on the Mt Welcome pastoral lease.•Th CPis not aware of any existing impediments nor of any potential impedimentswhich may impact ongoing exploration and development activities at the projectsite.
Explorationdone byotherparties	•Acknowledgment and appraisal ofexploration by other parties.	•A full search and compilation of historic exploration has been completed.•Work included stream sediment, soil and rock sampling, geological mapping,geophysical surveys, drilling, resource estimation and mining studies.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Geology	•Deposit type, geological setting andstyle of mineralisation.	•Magmatic Ni-Cu-PGE and orogenic gold mineralisation.•Paleoarchean greenstone rocks intruded by Mesoarchean mafic-ultramafic intrusivecomplex associated with widespread disseminated to matrix and stringer pyrrhotitepentlandite-chalcopyrite mineralisation. Mesoarchean mylonite in the Sholl ShearZone north of the property, with lode gold mineralisation in related subsidiarystructures.
Drill holeInformation	•A summary of all information materialto the understanding of theexploration results including atabulation of the following informationfor all Material drill holes:oeasting and northing of the drillhole collaroelevation or RL (Reduced Level –elevation above sea level in metres)of the drill hole collarodip and azimuth of the holeodown hole length and interceptiondepthohole length.•If the exclusion of this information isjustified on the basis that theinformation is not Material and thisexclusion does not detract from theunderstanding of the report, theCompetent Person should clearlyexplain why this is the case.	••Themineralresource estimation utilised RC and Diamond Drillholes, with theabsolute exclusion of RAB and Aircore holes, from the compiled drilling databasecomprising a total of 716 holes for 83,841m drilled by previous explorers and RaidenResources Ltd.•The 2022 diamond drill program by Raiden purposely twinned historic holes,generally drilling at approximately 5m distance from those holes, to verify theaccuracy of the historic drill hole data for use within this MRE.•Detailed specifics of individual holes are not required as the announcement is for amineral resource estimate.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Dataaggregationmethods	•In reporting Exploration Results,weighting averaging techniques,maximum and/or minimum gradetruncations (eg cutting of high grades)and cut-off grades are usually Materialand should be stated.•Where aggregate interceptsincorporate short lengths of highgrade results and longer lengths of lowgrade results, the procedure used forsuch aggregation should be stated andsome typical examples of such	•Length weighted average grade calculations have been applied to reported assay intervals.•No maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) or cut-offgrades were applied.•Reported nickel and copper mineralised intersections for the drilling are based on interceptsusing a lower grade cut-off of 0.5% Ni_Eq for the overall mineralised zones•Metal equivalent values are reported, using the calculations and assumptionsbelow:Price assumptions used to inform the calculation of equivalent nickel grade to report theassay results:Nickel price/lb = US$13.30Copper price/lb = US$4.20Cobalt price/lb =
	aggregations should be shown indetail.•The assumptions used for anyreporting of metal equivalent valuesshould be clearly stated.	US$22.22Silver price/oz = US$23.60Gold price/oz = US$1,900.00Platinum price/oz = US$1010Palladium price / oz = US$1,565The reporting pit shell represents the revenue factor 0.7 shell. The above spotcommodity pricing does not reflect the revenue factor pricing used in the pitoptimisation.1Nickel and Copper Equivalent (Ni_Eq& Cu_Eq) FormulasNi_Eq and Cu_Eq values were calculated from the estimated element grades andassumed commodity prices (in body of the announcement above) along with elementrecoveries based on historic flotation processes at Radio Hill, limited metallurgical testwork, including recovery information, completed on B2 by MetPlant Engineering ServicesPty Ltd as part of the Fox Resources Ltd. Feasibility Study on the B2 deposit completed in2007 and similar Ni-Cu_Co_PGE projects producing two concentrates from flotation suchas the recoveries of Cu-Ni-Co-Zn-Pd-Pt-Au from the PolyMet Mining Corp. layered maficNorthMet Deposit located in northern Minnesota. Ni recovery curves were extrapolated

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		from the MetPlant Engineering feasibility results across the fullrange of Ni grades in themodel. A similar approach was taken to derive the Cu recovery curve.It is the Company'sopinion that all the elements included in the metal equivalents calculation have areasonable potential to be recovered. However, it is noted that at this stage the companyhas only limited mineralogical and metallurgical data on the mineralisation at Mt Shollandthat further metallurgical test work is anticipated to begin in the near term.
		Recovery assumptions usedfor both Ni and Cu Equivalent Values:
		Nickel recovery = (0.47151-0.06154*(Ni % grade)2+0.40033* Ni % grade) with recoveriescapped at 85% above 1.15% Ni
		Copper recovery = (0.6-0.06154*(Cu% grade)2+0.40033*Cu% grade) with recoveriescapped at 85% above 0.70% Cu
		Cobalt recovery = 0.36%
		Silver recovery = 0.60%
		Gold recovery = 0.73%
		Palladium recovery = 0.83%
		Platinum recovery = 0.85%
		Nickel KV calculations:
		CuKV = (cu_price * 22.04622 * cu_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
		CoKV = (co_price /31.1035/14.58co_rec)/(ni_price22.04622* recovery_ni_variable)
		AgKV = (ag_price / 31.1035 * ag_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
		AuKV = (au_price / 31.1035 * au_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)

PdKV = (pd_price /	31.1035 * pd_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
	PtKV = (pt_price / 31.1035 * pt_rec)/(ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)
Nickel Equivalent Formula
KV calculations	Ni_Eq = (Ni + CuCuKV + CoCoKV + AgAgKV + AuAuKV + PdPdKV + PtPtKV)Copper
recovery_cu_variable)	NiKV = (ni_price * 22.04622 * recovery_ni_variable)/(cu_price * 22.04622 *
	CoKV = (co_price / 453.49 * co_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
	AgKV = (ag_price / 31.1035 * ag_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
	AuKV = (au_price / 31.1035 * au_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
	PdKV = (pd_price / 31.1035 * pd_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
	PtKV = (pt_price / 31.1035 * pt_rec)/(cu_price * 22.04622 * recovery_cu_variable)
	Copper Equivalent Formula
Cu_Eq = (Cu + Ni	* NiKV + Co* CoKV + Ag* AgKV + Au* AuKV + Pd* PdKV + Pt* PtKV)
••RelationshipThese relationships are particularlybetweenimportant in the reporting ofmineralisatiExploration Results.on widths•If the geometry of the mineralisation	Intercepts are quoted as downhole lengths; holes were oriented roughlyperpendicular to mineralisation but the true width is not known.
andwith respect to the drill hole angle isinterceptknown, its nature should be reported.lengths•If it is not known and only the downhole lengths are reported, there should

Page 36 of 45

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	be a clear statement to this effect (eg'down hole length, true width notknown').
Diagrams	•Appropriate maps and sections (withscales) and tabulations of interceptsshould be included for any significantdiscovery being reported These shouldinclude, but not be limited to a planview of drill hole collar locations andappropriate sectional views.	•Maps, plans and sections are included in the body of the announcement.
Balancedreporting	•Where comprehensive reporting of allExploration Results is not practicable,representative reporting of both lowand high grades and/or widths shouldbe practiced to avoid misleadingreporting of Exploration Results.	•All historic results are reportedas they have been released to the ASX by theprevious companiesand by Raiden Resources Ltd since acquisition of the project.
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata	•Other exploration data, if meaningfuland material, should be reportedincluding (butnot limited to):geological observations; geophysicalsurvey results; geochemical surveyresults; bulk samples –size andmethod of treatment; metallurgicaltest results; bulk density, groundwater,geotechnical and rock characteristics;potential deleterious or contaminatingsubstances.	•All relevant data isreported in this release.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Furtherwork	•The nature and scale of plannedfurther work (egtests for lateralextensions or depth extensions orlarge-scale step-out drilling).•Diagrams clearly highlighting theareas of possible extensions, includingthe main geological interpretationsand future drilling areas, provided thisinformation is not commerciallysensitive.	•Raiden are currently planning further extensional drillingto further assess theextentofMt Sholl JORC (2012) Mineral Resources, as well as, metallurgical studies onavailable material.

JORC Code 2012 Edition – Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources.(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Databaseintegrity	•Measures taken to ensure that data has notbeen corrupted by, for example, transcriptionor keying errors, between its initial collectionand its use for Mineral Resource estimationpurposes.•Data validation procedures used.	•Historic data was stored in an Access database. This database was neveredited through the resource estimation process, only copied from. The 2022twin drilling was used to validate the historic data. Historic and 2022 drillpairs were analyzed visually, statistically and using downhole variography todemonstrate the integrity of the historic drill data.
Site visits	•Comment on any site visits undertaken by theCompetent Person and the outcome of thosevisits.•If no site visits have been undertaken indicatewhy this is the case.	•No site visit has taken place. Covid related travel restrictions limited thatopportunity.
Geologicalinterpretation	•Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertaintyof)the geological interpretation of the mineraldeposit.•Nature of the data used and of any	•The Mt Sholl geologic model, used to constrain Ni-Cu-Co-Pd-Pt-Au-Ag gradesin the 2023 Mt Sholl maiden resource calculations, was interpreted from thecombination of historic and 2022 Raiden Resources drilling, the geological

Page 38 of 45

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	assumptions made.•The effect, if any, of alternativeinterpretations on Mineral Resourceestimation.•The use of geology in guiding and controllingMineral Resource estimation.•The factors affecting continuity both of gradeand geology.	interpretation from Terra Resources; ground Electro-magnetic data; theHoatson, et. al. 2006 Type 2A classification of massive and disseminatedtholeiitic nickel sulphide deposits, as well as, Company's internal geologicalmodelling.•The Type 2A classification model concept is a lopolithshaped ultramaficintrusion with Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation concentrated at the base of themafic/ultramafic (dolerite/gabbro/pyroxenite) package contact. The TerraResources geological interpretation outlines an ultramafic zone, displaced bylate faulting, in the shape of a bathtub intruded intoa basement of basaltunit. Historic and 2022 drilling confirms the model concept across the A1,B1, B2 and Kudos deposits. Higher grade Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation isconcentrated directly above the contact with the basement basalt in a 20-30metre thick zone which is overlain by a low-grade mineralisation zone ofvarying thickness and extent.•Reviewing the Mt Sholl drilling database, Ni-Cu grade zonation and loggedlithology clearly distinguish the basement, basal unit and overlaying lowgrade mineralisation zones. 3D solids for each of these zones at A1, B1, B2and Kudos were generated to code geologic domains and constrain the MtSholl resource model estimation within.
Dimensions	•The extent and variability of the MineralResource expressed as length (along strike orotherwise), plan width, and depth belowsurface to the upper and lower limits of theMineral Resource.	•A1 532m on strike x 412m down dip•B1 586m on strike x 376m down dip•B2 north 737m on strike x 285m down dip•B2 central 674m on strike x 300m down dip•B2 Deposit mineralisation in total extends 2.6km on strike•Kudos 635m on strike x 426m down dip•Mineralisationhas been drilled to a depth of 150-200m from surface in

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		general
Estimationandmodellingtechniques	•The nature and appropriateness of theestimation technique(s) applied and keyassumptions, including treatment of extremegrade values, domaining, interpolationparameters and maximum distance ofextrapolation from data points. If a computerassisted estimation method was choseninclude a description of computer softwareand parameters used.•The availability of check estimates, previousestimates and/or mine production records andwhether the Mineral Resource estimate takesappropriate account of such data.•The assumptions made regarding recovery ofby-products.•Estimation of deleterious elements or othernon-grade variables of economic significance(eg sulphur for acid mine drainagecharacterisation).•In the case of blockmodel interpolation, theblock size in relation to the average samplespacing and the search employed.•Any assumptions behind modelling of selectivemining units.•Any assumptions about correlation betweenvariables.•Description of how the geological	•The mineral resource estimate comprises a single block model incorporatingthe A1, B1, B2 and Kudos deposits. Parent blocks are 10m x 10m x 5m in x, y,z respectively and subblocks as small as 1m x 1m x1m were used to honourdomain boundaries.•Four domains were modelled through the deposits, an upper barren zone(Zone1), a locally extensive lo-grade zone (Zone2), the Basal primarymineralisationzone and the essentially barren basement. Three dimensionalsolids were modelled in Vulcan for each hard domain.•Ni-Cu-Co-PGE grades were estimated into the Basal and Zone2 units. At A1,B1 and B2, ordinary kriging of 1m composites weighted by variograms for Niand Cu. At Kudos, inverse distance weighting squared was applied to 1mcomposites. Co was estimated along with Ni in all deposits, PGE and silverwere estimated with Cu.•Capping of grades or limiting search distance based on grade was applied asnecessary to mitigate the possibility of over estimation of grades. Swathplots ofNi and Cu and visual verification of the estimations were used tovalidate the estimates.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	interpretation was used to control theresource estimates.•Discussion of basis for using or not usinggrade cutting or capping.•The process of validation, the checking processused, the comparison of model data to drillhole data, and use of reconciliation data ifavailable.
Moisture	•Whether the tonnages are estimated on a drybasis or with natural moisture, and themethod of determination of the moisturecontent.	•Tonnes are estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-offparameters	•The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) orquality parameters applied.	•The cut-offs cover mining, processing, and overhead costs assuming a 2Mtpaflotation plant.
Miningfactors orassumptions	•Assumptions made regarding possible miningmethods, minimum mining dimensions andinternal (or, if applicable, external) miningdilution. It is always necessary as part of theprocess of determining reasonable prospectsfor eventual economic extraction to considerpotential mining methods, but theassumptions made regarding mining methodsand parameters when estimating MineralResources may not always be rigorous. Wherethis is the case, this should be reported with	•For the Mt Sholl project, the requirements for reasonable extraction havebeen met by reporting blocks above the preliminary open pit mining surfacethat account for mining costs, processing costs, overhead costs and pit slopeangles. The reported underground resource are those blocks adjacent to thepit shell, occurring in a mass considered potentially mineable and above thecut-off grade.
		Table 2: Pit OptimisationAssumptions
		ParameterUnitValue
		Overall pit slope angleDegrees55 at B2, 50 at A1, B1 and Kudos
	an explanation of the basis of the mining	Mining CostUS$/t mined3.45
	assumptions made.	Incremental mining costUS$/t mined / 5m depth0.01

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		Processing costUS$/t processed12.00
		G&A costUS$/t processed2.50
Metallurgical factors orassumptions	•The basis for assumptions or predictionsregarding metallurgical amenability. It isalways necessary as part of the process ofdetermining reasonable prospects for eventualeconomic extraction to consider potentialmetallurgical methods, but the assumptionsregarding metallurgical treatment processesand parameters made when reporting MineralResources may not always be rigorous. Wherethis is the case, this should be reported withan explanation of the basis of themetallurgical assumptions made.	Element recoveries based on historic flotation processes at Radio Hill, limitedhistoric metallurgical test work, including recovery information, completedon B2 by MetPlant Engineering Services Pty Ltd as part of the Fox ResourcesLtd. Feasibility Study on the B2 deposit completed in 2007, and similar Ni-CuCo-PGE projects producing two concentrates from flotation such as therecoveries of Cu-Ni-Co-Zn-Pd-Pt-Au from the PolyMet Mining Corp. layeredmafic NorthMet Deposit located in northern Minnesota. Ni recovery curveswere extrapolated from the MetPlant Engineering feasibility results acrossthe full range of Ni grades in the model. A similar approach was taken toderive the Cu recovery curve. It is the Company's opinion that all theelements included in the metal equivalents calculation have a reasonablepotential to be recovered.
		Recovery assumptions used:oNickel recovery=(0.47151-0.06154*(Ni % grade)2+0.40033* Ni %grade) with recoveries capped at 85% above 1.15% NioCopper recovery= (0.6-0.06154*(Cu% grade)2+0.40033*Cu% grade)with recoveries capped at 85% above 0.70% Cu.oCobalt recovery = 0.36%oSilver recovery = 0.60%oGold recovery = 0.73%oPalladium recovery = 0.83%oPlatinum recovery = 0.85%

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Environmental factors orassumptions	•Assumptions made regarding possible wasteand process residue disposal options. It isalways necessary as part of the process ofdetermining reasonable prospects for eventualeconomic extraction to consider the potentialenvironmental impacts of the miningandprocessing operation. While at this stage thedetermination of potential environmentalimpacts, particularly for a greenfields project,may not always be well advanced, the statusof early consideration of these potentialenvironmental impacts should be reported.Where these aspects have not beenconsidered this should be reported with anexplanation of the environmental assumptionsmade.	•The CP is not aware of any environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation,socio-economic, marketing, political,or other relevant factors that couldmaterially affect the Mineral Resource estimate.
Bulk density	•Whether assumed or determined. If assumed,the basis for the assumptions. If determined,the method used, whether wet or dry, thefrequency of the measurements, the nature,size and representativeness of the samples.•The bulk density for bulk material musthavebeen measured by methods that adequatelyaccount for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc),moisture and differences between rock andalteration zones within the deposit.•Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimatesused in the evaluation process of the differentmaterials.	•Bulk densities in the Basal unit are 3.06 and in Zone2 are 2.91. These figuresrepresent averages of the values collected in the respective domains fromthe 2022 drill program.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Classification	•The basis for the classification of the MineralResources into varying confidence categories.•Whether appropriate account has been takenof all relevant factors (ie relative confidence intonnage/grade estimations, reliability of inputdata, confidence in continuity of geology andmetal values, quality, quantity anddistribution of the data).•Whether the result appropriately reflects theCompetent Person's view of the deposit.	•Drill holes are located at a nominal spacing of 40m by 40m.The drill spacingis sufficient to allow the geology and mineralisation zones to be modelledinto coherent wireframes solids for each domain. Reasonable consistency isevident in the orientation, thickness and grades of the mineralised zones.•The MineralResource at A1, B1 and B2 is classified as Indicated where, in theCP's opinion, sufficient data exists to assume geological and mineralisationcontinuity. The Indicated classification generally represents areas of theprimary mineralisation zone with 40mx 40m drill hole spacing.•The Mineral Resource is classified as Inferred where there is sufficientevidence to imply but not verify geological and grade continuity. The Inferredblocks are generally around the periphery and depth extent of the majormineralisation domains and in smaller domains with limited samples. TheInferred classification generally represents areas with greater than 50m by50m drill hole spacing. All of the Kudos resource is reported as Inferred, as isall of the underground resource.
Audits orreviews	•The results of any audits or reviews of MineralResource estimates.	•Swath plots of Ni and Cu composite vs block grades and visual verificationwere used to validate the estimates.
Discussionof relativeaccuracy/confidence	•Where appropriate a statement of the relativeaccuracy and confidence level in the MineralResource estimate using an approach orprocedure deemed appropriate by theCompetent Person. For example, theapplication of statistical or geostatisticalproceduresto quantify the relative accuracy ofthe resource within stated confidence limits,or, if such an approach is not deemed	•The Mineral Resource has been classified as Indicated and Inferred based onthe guidelines specified in the JORC Code (2012). The classification level isbased upon assessment of the geological understanding of the Mt ShollDeposits, geological and mineralisation continuity, drillhole spacing, QCresults, search and interpolation parameters, and analysis of availabledensity information.•The Mt Sholl Deposits show good continuity of mineralisation within welldefined geological constraints. The CP considers the model suitable both for

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	appropriate, a qualitative discussion of thefactors that could affect the relative accuracyand confidence of the estimate.•The statement should specify whether itrelates to global or local estimates, and, iflocal, state the relevant tonnages, whichshould be relevant to technical and economicevaluation. Documentation should includeassumptions made and the procedures used.•These statements of relative accuracy andconfidence of the estimate should becompared with production data, whereavailable.	reporting and for use in mine planning.