RUMBLE RESOURCES LIMITED — Investor Presentation 2014

Jan 28, 2014

29th January 2014

IP Survey Identifies Highly Chargeable Target Zones at the Beadell Project

• Results from the dipole-dipole Induced Polarisation (IP) survey have identified significant chargeable zones which may be associated with disseminated sulphide style base metal or gold mineralisation.
• Rumble has been awarded up to $150,000 in drill funding under the State Governments Exploration Incentive Scheme which will be used to drill test these targets.
• A review of historic exploration and government data along with geological reconnaissance on recent exploration licence applications has identified untested airborne EM conductors some of which are coincident with anomalous copper-silver rock chip sample results (up to 23% Copper & 661g/t Silver) and a untested high tenor copper-cobalt soil anomaly.
• The Paterson Province of Western Australia is host to world class mineral deposits such as the Telfer Gold Mine, Nifty Copper Mine and the Kintyre Uranium Deposit.

Rumble Resources Ltd "Rumble" is pleased to provide an update on the Company's Beadell Project located in the Paterson Province 450km east of Newman in northern Western Australia (Figure 1). The Proterozoic-aged Paterson Province is host to several significant operating mines and mineral deposits including the Telfer Gold Mine, Nifty Copper Mine, Maroochydore Copper Deposit and the Kintyre Uranium Deposit. Recent exploration success in the area has been announced by Encounter Resources Ltd (asx:enr) with significant copper sulphide intersections at the BM1 and BM7 Prospects and anomalous zinc sulphide intersections at the BM2 Prospect. Encounter Resources Ltd currently have an earn in JV agreement with major copper producer Antofagasta PLC whereby they may earn an initial 51% of the project by expenditure of $20 million over a 5 year period.

Figure 1: Beadell Project showing exploration licence holdings, prospects and new targets.

Rumble Resources Ltd

Level 1, 33 Richardson St, West Perth, WA 6005

T +61 8 6555 3980

F +61 8 6555 3981

rumbleresources.com.au

ASX RTR

Executives & Management

Mr Shane Sikora CEO

Mr Terry Topping Executive Director

Mr Andrew McBain Non-executive Director

Mr Matthew Banks Non-executive Director

Mr Michael Smith Non-executive Director

Mr David Palumbo Company Secretary

Mr Andrew Jones Exploration Manager

IP Survey Results

A dipole-dipole Induced Polarisation (IP) survey was completed in December 2013 at the Kaos and Ninety-Nine Prospects completing 4 lines for a total of 11.3 line km surveyed. These two prospects are markedly different targets. The Kaos Prospect is a 2.2 km long x 400m wide airborne EM anomaly whilst the Ninety-Nine Prospect is an IP chargeability high associated with a folded unit of highly magnetic banded iron formation. A single drill hole at Ninety-Nine in 2012 drilled through banded iron formation and potassic altered tonalities and gneisses but failed to intersect and explain the IP target. The drill hole returned some anomalous gold values, including 1m @ 0.75g/t and 2m @ 0.43g/t, and petrology identified the presence of the uranium mineral uranothorite, copper sulphide mineral chalcopyrite and cerium mineral synchysite

In December 2013 at the Kaos Prospect an IP survey line was completed across the main airborne EM anomaly and lines completed at the Ninety-Nine Prospect to the east of Kaos were extended to the north to cross the Kaos stratigraphic position. The survey line across the main Kaos EM feature identified a moderate chargeable zone coincident with the airborne EM anomaly (Anomaly E) and also identified a deeper chargeable zone with no associated EM anomaly (Anomaly D; Figures 2 & 3). The lines that crossed the Kaos position to the east identified a highly chargeable zone which correlates with moderate conductivity and a magnetic high (Anomaly A). These targets have not been drill tested.

Three IP survey lines were completed at the Ninety-Nine Prospect where a single IP line was completed in 2012 identifying a highly chargeable zone associated with a magnetic high. The three IP lines undertaken in December 2013 were oriented better to define the chargeable zone. The survey identified two very highly chargeable zones (Anomalies B & C) with moderate conductivity and associated magnetic high with one on either side of a northwest trending fold.

Figure 2: Location of main prospect areas and newly generated IP Anomalies on Airborne EM background.

The IP anomalies identified are summarised below:

Anomaly A - is a new strongly chargeable response to the east of Kaos which correlates with moderate conductivity (>15 mV/V), and a magnetic high.

Anomaly B - is the chargeable response previously defined at Ninety-Nine Prospect in 2012. It is very strongly chargeable (>50 mV/V), moderately conductive, and correlates with a magnetic and topographic high on the northern side of a fold. Drill hole BDRCD022 failed to intersect this strong chargeable zone.

Anomaly C - is a newly defined, very strong chargeable high (>50 mV/V), at the Ninety-Nine Prospect, moderately conductive, and correlates with a magnetic and topographic high.

Anomaly D - a shallow moderately chargeable response at the Kaos Prospect was co-incident with the shallow airborne EM conductor (15 to 20 mV/V).

Anomaly E - A stronger deeper chargeable response was identified at the Kaos Prospect which has no airborne EM conductive response (40 mV/V).

The new IP data in association with existing datasets will assist with better drill targeting for the coming field season when the Company intends on utilising the $150,000 EIS drilling grant to assist with the costs of drill testing the Kaos and Ninety-Nine Prospects.

Figure 3: IP traverse lines showing newly generated IP Anomalies (A to E) with conductivity as background.

Recent Exploration Licence Application Areas

In 2013 Rumble lodged three new Exploration Licence Applications (E45/4223, E45/4233 & E45/4267) at the Beadell Project increasing the projects size to a combined area of 920 km2 and significantly increasing the projects prospectivity. The Beadell Project contains mapped areas of the Rudall Complex which hosts the Maxwell, Kaos and Ninety-Nine Prospects and now with the new applications also mapped areas of the Yeneena Supergroup which hosts the Nifty

Copper Mine, Maroochydore Copper Deposit and new discoveries by Encounter Resources at BM1, BM2 and BM7 to the north. Rumble believes that the Beadell Project is prospective for sediment hosted base metal Cu-Zn-Pb-Ag, structurally controlled copper and intrusion-related Cu-Au mineralisation.

Recent review of the data compilation and new application areas which included processing of a 2007 Airborne EM survey undertaken by Geoscience Australia across the Paterson Province, ground reconnaissance and rock chip sampling of one EM anomaly has highlighted some encouraging factors which has significantly increased the projects overall prospectivity (Figures 1 & 4):

• 1. Several discrete untested Airborne EM anomalies are present within the expanded project area which has not been evaluated by either ground checking, soil sampling, ground EM or drilling.
• 2. A site visit to the area of one Airborne EM anomaly identified the presence of copper oxide mineralisation (malachite) which returned rock chip samples ranging from 0.22% to a peak of 23.9% Cu and 661ppm to a peak of 5.2 g/t Ag (Table 1). The high values in Copper and Silver which are coincident with the airborne EM anomaly represent a high priority target.
• 3. Four close spaced rock chip samples taken by CRA Exploration Pty Ltd in 1993 returned copper assays ranging from 0.04% up to a peak of 1.7% Cu. These rock chips are from mapped sedimentary units of the Yeneena Supergroup and no follow-up to evaluate these results has been completed.
• 4. A thirty-two sample soil sampling program over mapped units of the Yeneena Supergroup completed by CRA in 1993 returned values ranging from 11ppm to 607ppm copper, 0.21ppm to 12.5ppm silver, 9ppm - 1800ppm cobalt and 539ppm to 9830ppm barium which are considered highly anomalous soil values which have had no follow-up exploration and
• 5. The McKay Fault Zone, a regionally important fault structure associated with copper mineralisation to the north of the project area runs through the enlarged Beadell Project area.

Figure 4:Beadell Project with Airborne EM as background with main prospect areas and newly identified soil, rock chip and EM targets.

- ENDS -

For further information visit www.rumbleresources.com.au or email enquiries@rumbleresources.com.au

About Rumble Resources Ltd

Rumble Resources Ltd is an Australian based exploration company, officially admitted to the ASX on the 1st July 2011. Rumble was established with the aim of adding significant value to its current gold and base metal assets and will continue to look at mineral acquisition opportunities both in Australia and abroad.

About the Beadell Project

The Beadell Project (Rumble 80%) is located 450km East of Newman and covers a combined area of 766km2across 1 granted exploration licence and 5 exploration licence applications. The project area covers part of the Proterozoic-aged Paterson Province which is host to significant mineral deposits and operating mines including the Telfer Gold Mine, Nifty Copper Mine and Kintyre Uranium deposit.

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Terry Topping, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy and the Australian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Topping is a fulltime employee of Rumble Resources Limited and has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Mr Topping consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

Table 1: Rock chip samples taken over Airborne EM anomaly

Sample ID	Easting	Northing	Datum	Au ppm	Ag ppm	Cu %
PBCR00A	457114	7469834	MGA94 Zone 51	<0.01	661	23.9
PBCR00B	457122	7469826	MGA94 Zone 51	<0.01	5.2	0.222

*Au assay by Fire Assay. Ag and Cu assay by ICP-AES.

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Samplingtechniques	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels,random chips, or specific specialised industrystandard measurement tools appropriate to theminerals under investigation, such as down holegamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).These examples should not be taken as limiting thebroad meaning of sampling.Include reference to measures taken to ensuresample representivity and the appropriate calibrationof any measurement tools or systems used.Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that areMaterial to the Public Report.In cases where 'industry standard' work has beendone this would be relatively simple (eg 'reversecirculation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samplesfrom which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 gcharge for fire assay'). In other cases moreexplanation may be required, such as where there iscoarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (egsubmarine nodules) may warrant disclosure ofdetailed information.	Rock chip samples taken by RumbleResources Ltd were of outcropping rockand collected using a geology hammer.Approximately 2kg of sample wascollected in a pre-numbered calicosample bag.Samples were crushed and pulverized tonominal 85% passing 75 micron sizeprior to assaying.
Drillingtechniques	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-holehammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc)and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube,depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or othertype, whether core is oriented and if so, by whatmethod, etc).	Not Applicable
Drillsamplerecovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chipsample recoveries and results assessed.Measures taken to maximise sample recovery andensure representative nature of the samples.Whether a relationship exists between samplerecovery and grade and whether sample bias mayhave occurred due to preferential loss/gain offine/coarse material.	Not Applicable
Logging	Whether core and chip samples have beengeologically and geotechnically logged to a level ofdetail to support appropriate Mineral Resourceestimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative innature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.The total length and percentage of the relevantintersections logged.	Not Applicable
Subsamplingtechniquesandsamplepreparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, halfor all core taken.If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split,etc and whether sampled wet or dry.For all sample types, the nature, quality andappropriateness of the sample preparation technique.Quality control procedures adopted for all subsampling stages to maximise representivity ofsamples.Measures taken to ensure that the sampling isrepresentative of the in situ material collected,including for instance results for fieldduplicate/second-half sampling.Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain	Not ApplicableNot Applicable

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Quality ofassay dataandlaboratorytests	size of the material being sampled.The nature, quality and appropriateness of theassaying and laboratory procedures used andwhether the technique is considered partial or total.For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRFinstruments, etc, the parameters used in determiningthe analysis including instrument make and model,reading times, calibrations factors applied and theirderivation, etc.Nature of quality control procedures adopted (egstandards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratorychecks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ielack of bias) and precision have been established.	Internal laboratory standards were usedto ensure analytical quality.
Verificationofsamplingandassaying	The verification of significant intersections by eitherindependent or alternative company personnel.The use of twinned holes.Documentation of primary data, data entryprocedures, data verification, data storage (physicaland electronic) protocols.Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	Not Applicable
Location ofdata points	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mineworkings and other locations used in MineralResource estimation.Specification of the grid system used.Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	Data points were located by GPS.Elevation values were in AHD. Expectedaccuracy is +/- 5m for northing andeasting and 15m for elevationcoordinates.The grid system is GDA94(MGA), zone51The GPS is +/- 15m, and the land surfaceis flat
Dataspacinganddistribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficientto establish the degree of geological and gradecontinuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource andOre Reserve estimation procedure(s) andclassifications applied.Whether sample compositing has been applied.	Two rock chip samples were taken byRumble approximately 10m apart.Not Applicable.Not Applicable.
Orientationof data inrelation togeologicalstructure	Whether the orientation of sampling achievesunbiased sampling of possible structures and theextent to which this is known, considering the deposittype.If the relationship between the drilling orientation andthe orientation of key mineralised structures isconsidered to have introduced a sampling bias, thisshould be assessed and reported if material.	The data spacing at this stage is notsufficient to establish both geological andgrade continuity.
Samplesecurity	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Not Applicable.
Audits orreviews	The results of any audits or reviews of samplingtechniques and data.	Not Applicable.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineraltenement andland tenurestatus	Type, reference name/number, location andownership including agreements or material issueswith third parties such as joint ventures,partnerships, overriding royalties, native titleinterests, historical sites, wilderness or nationalpark and environmental settings.The security of the tenure held at the time ofreporting along with any known impediments toobtaining a licence to operate in the area.	The IP survey is located wholly withinExploration Licence E45/2405 owned by80% Rumble Resources LtdThe rock chip samples taken are withinE45/4186 owned 90% by RumbleResources Ltd.Tenement E45/2405 is in good standingand no known impediments toexploration exist.E45/4186 is at theapplication stage.
Explorationdone by otherparties	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration byother parties.	Cauldron Energy completed an AirborneEM survey and followed this up with 6RC drill holes in 2010.The CRA Exploration Pty Ltd soilsampling and rock chip samplingreferenced was undertaken in 1994.
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style ofmineralisation.	The Company is exploring for basemetals and gold mineralisation
Drill holeInformation	A summary of all information material to theunderstanding of the exploration results including atabulation of the following information for allMaterial drill holes:oeasting and northing of the drill hole collaroelevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevationabove sea level in metres) of the drill hole collarodip and azimuth of the holeodown hole length and interception depthohole length.If the exclusion of this information is justified on thebasis that the information is not Material and thisexclusion does not detract from the understandingof the report, the Competent Person should clearlyexplain why this is the case.	Not Applicable.
Dataaggregationmethods	In reporting Exploration Results, weightingaveraging techniques, maximum and/or minimumgrade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) andcut-off grades are usually Material and should bestated.Where aggregate intercepts incorporate shortlengths of high grade results and longer lengths oflow grade results, the procedure used for suchaggregation should be stated and some typicalexamples of such aggregations should be shown indetail.The assumptions used for any reporting of metalequivalent values should be clearly stated.	Not Applicable.
Relationshipbetweenmineralisationwidths andinterceptlengths	These relationships are particularly important in thereporting of Exploration Results.If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect tothe drill hole angle is known, its nature should bereported.If it is not known and only the down hole lengthsare reported, there should be a clear statement tothis effect (eg 'down hole length, true width notknown').	Not Applicable.

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) andtabulations of intercepts should be included for anysignificant discovery being reported These shouldinclude, but not be limited to a plan view of drillhole collar locations and appropriate sectionalviews.	Not Applicable.
Balancedreporting	Where comprehensive reporting of all ExplorationResults is not practicable, representative reportingof both low and high grades and/or widths shouldbe practiced to avoid misleading reporting ofExploration Results.	Not Applicable.
Othersubstantiveexplorationdata	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,should be reported including (but not limited to):geological observations; geophysical surveyresults; geochemical survey results; bulk samples– size and method of treatment; metallurgical testresults; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnicaland rock characteristics; potential deleterious orcontaminating substances.	Not Applicable.
Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work (egtests for lateral extensions or depth extensions orlarge-scale step-out drilling).Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possibleextensions, including the main geologicalinterpretations and future drilling areas, providedthis information is not commercially sensitive.	At this stage, the IP results areindicative in nature and require furtherexploration to establish the true size andnature of the mineralisation, if any.Refer to diagrams in body of report.