SUPERIOR RESOURCES LIMITED

ASX Release 18 December 2017

ACN 112 844 407

==> picture [109 x 87] intentionally omitted <==

NEW PROSPECT AT GREENVALE HIGHLIGHTS HIGH COBALT IN SOIL VALUES

REVIEW OF CURRENT PROJECTS – COBALT

HIGHLIGHTS:

New Lucky Creek Prospect:
new target identified at the Greenvale Project with anomalously high cobalt in soil values up to 596ppm Co, together with anomalous nickel, copper and zinc
No previous follow-up exploration or drilling
Initial drilling of Lucky Creek Prospect planned for early 2018
A review of Superior’s north west Queensland Mount Isa Style lead-zincsilver projects underway for cobalt mineralisation potential

Superior Resources Limited (ASX Code: SPQ ) ( Superior or Company ) has completed an initial review of historical cobalt results at its 100% owned Greenvale Project in north east Queensland. The review exercise was conducted as part of the Company’s 2018 exploration planning for the Greenvale Project.

The review has identified a new nickel-cobalt-copper-zinc prospect, the Lucky Creek Prospect, located within the highly mineralised Lucky Creek Corridor (Figures 1 and 8). Several other of the Company’s recently reported prospects, including Superior’s Bottletree, Steam Engine, Galah Dam, Cockie Creek and One Mile prospects, are also located within the Lucky Creek Corridor.

The Lucky Creek Prospect is located 12km west of the Greenvale Nickel-Cobalt Mine and similarly adjacent to the SCONI scandium-cobalt-nickel project (Australian Mines Limited) (Figure 2), which is comparable in size and operationally to Clean TeQ Holding’s Syerston Nickel-Cobalt Project.

Compilation and imaging of historical soil sampling data has delineated the Lucky Creek Prospect by anomalously high nickel (up to 1220 ppm) and cobalt (up to 596 ppm) soil values aligned along a northeast-southwest zone (Figures 3 to 6).

Additionally, Superior is conducting a review of expected cobalt potential at its northwest Queensland Victor Project and Nicholson Project (5kms from Walford Creek copper-cobalt project: Aeon Metals).

Managing Director, Peter Hwang commented “ The new Lucky Creek Prospect with its anomalous nickel and cobalt, adds another dimension to the already prolific Greenvale Project: one that we are eager to pursue with a maiden drilling program early next year. With the SCONI scandium-cobaltnickel project and the Greenvale Nickel-Cobalt Mine located only about 12 kilometres away, we were not surprised to have identified high cobalt-in-soil values that clearly delineate a cobalt-nickel-

Unit 8, 61 Holdsworth Street, Coorparoo Queensland 4151 │ PO Box 189, Coorparoo, Queensland, 4151 T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au │ ABN 72 112 844 407

Superior Resources Limited

copper target.

The potential of the Greenvale Project continues to expand and excite with other recently reported deposits such as the Cockie Creek porphyry copper-gold prospect located 3 kilometres to the west, Steam Engine Gold Deposit 10 kilometres to the south west and the Bottletree Prospect 15 kilometres to the south west.

Driven by ambitious global renewable energy targets, demand and market prices for cobalt have reached a 9-year high. Currently, at least fifty percent of the world’s cobalt is sourced from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), however, with the DRC’s political instability and ethically challenging mining practices, we will likely see increasing demand for Australian-produced cobalt.

Significant cobalt mineralisation is often associated with copper. Any cobalt mineralisation within our current Greenvale prospects has the potential to substantially increase the Greenvale Project’s value proposition. Whilst our current exploration work at the Greenvale Project will continue with vigour into phase 2 programs, we will also seek to capitalise on the cobalt potential that the region presents. ”

Lucky Creek Prospect

The Lucky Creek Prospect is part of Superior’s 100% owned Greenvale Project, located 210km west of Townsville in north east Queensland. Lucky Creek and other prospects within Superior’s Greenvale Project lie within the highly prospective “Lucky Creek Corridor”, which is considered to represent a remnant extension of the belt of rocks that host the large Cadia and North Parkes porphyry copper mines in northern NSW.

At the Lucky Creek Prospect which lies some 3km east of Superior’s Cockie Creek Porphyry Copper Deposit, high levels of cobalt occur in historical soil samples. These soil values extend over a distance of some 3.8km with a peak cobalt content of 596 ppm in one area associated with anomalous copper, nickel and zinc soil values. Peak values of up to 1220 ppm nickel, 272 ppm copper and 192 ppm zinc are also observed over the anomalous area.

To the northeast of this anomalous area a high order VTEM anomaly may indicate an extension of the zone of cobalt into this area (Figure 7). Further to the northeast of the VTEM anomaly, historical work has been completed on a ferruginous area with outcropping gossans showing anomalous soil copper and zinc values at the Lucky Duck Prospect. The entire zone of interest between Lucky Creek and Lucky Duck extends for 12km and lies within Superior’s tenements.

Only limited historical work (soil and limited rock chip sampling) has previously been reported along this zone.

The total prospective zone has substantial soil cover with only limited outcrop available for surface sampling. The Lucky Creek Prospect has not previously been drilled.

Next Steps

Superior intends to initially complete field work on the limited outcrops in the area to appraise the cobalt, copper and zinc potential followed by drilling beneath the soil cover during the next field season.

North west Queensland – Victor and Nicholson Projects

Superior is currently conducting a review of expected cobalt potential at its northwest Queensland Victor Project and Nicholson Project and will report the outcomes of the review in the coming few weeks.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 2

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [424 x 678] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1. Aster satellite imagery of the Lucky Creek Mineralised Corridor showing the location of the Lucky Creek Prospect and other prospects within the Greenvale Project.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 3

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [502 x 582] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2. Greenvale Project Tenements and prospect locations overlain on radiometric data, which clearly highlights the prospective Ordovician age rock sequences. The SCONI Project and Greenvale Nickel-Cobalt Mine are referenced (not held by Superior).

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 4

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [453 x 642] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3. Image of historic cobalt soil sampling data at the Lucky Creek Prospect. The maximum cobalt-insoil value is 596 ppm cobalt. The dashed polygons to the east and north east of Lucky Creek outline the location of high order VTEM anomalies.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 5

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [455 x 644] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4. Image of historic nickel soil sampling data at the Lucky Creek Prospect. The maximum nickel-in-soil value is 1220 ppm nickel. The dashed polygons to the east and north east of Lucky Creek outline the location of high order VTEM anomalies.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 6

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [467 x 662] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5. Image of historic copper soil sampling data at the Lucky Creek Prospect. The maximum copper-insoil value is 272 ppm copper. The dashed polygons to the east and north east of Lucky Creek outline the location of high order VTEM anomalies.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 7

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [469 x 663] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6. Image of historic zinc soil sampling data at the Lucky Creek Prospect. The maximum zinc-in-soil value is 192 ppm zinc. The dashed polygons to the east and north east of Lucky Creek outline the location of high order VTEM anomalies.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 8

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [460 x 651] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7. Image of sliding tau VTEM data showing the Lucky Creek VTEM anomaly.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 9

Superior Resources Limited

==> picture [497 x 341] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 8. Location of the Lucky Creek Prospect and other prospects within the Greenvale Project.

For more information:

Peter Hwang Carlos Fernicola Managing Director Chairman Tel: +61 7 3847 2887 +61 7 3229 1799 www.superiorresources.com.au [email protected]

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

Certain statements made in this report may contain or comprise certain forward-looking statements. Although Superior Resources Limited believes that any estimates and expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, no assurance can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Accordingly, results and estimations could differ materially from those set out in the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, changes in the economic and market conditions, success of business and operating initiatives and changes in the regulatory environment. Superior undertakes no obligation to update publicly or release any revisions of any forwardlooking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report or to reflect the occurrence of Figure 2. Steam Engine – Interpreted geology showing the gold bearing lodes and drill holes. unanticipated events.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 10

Superior Resources Limited

Appendix 1: JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
*Sampling*	• Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random	•	Information relating to historical results relies on data contained in reports submitted
*techniques*	chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement		to the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines as part of the
	tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as		Company Report System attaching to the grant of Exploration Permits.
	down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc.).	•	The sampling techniques, where reported, used standard industry approaches.
	These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad	•	Assaying of samples was completed by commercial laboratory methods that were
	meaning of sampling.		appropriate at the time the samples were collected.
	• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample	•	Whilst it is not possible to determine the reliability of historical assay results, no issues
	representivity and the appropriate calibration of any		arose during compilation and interpretation of the results that would suggest that the
	measurement tools or systems used.		assay results were not reasonable.
	• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are
	Material to the Public Report.
	• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this
	would be relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was
	used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to
	produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more
	explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse
	gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual
	commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules)
	may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
*Drilling*	• Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer,	•	N/A
*techniques*	rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g.
	core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails,
	face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if
	_so, by what method, etc.). _
*Drill sample*	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample	•	N/A
*recovery*	recoveries and results assessed.
	• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
	representative nature of the samples.
	• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 11

Superior Resources Limited

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to
	preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
*Logging*	• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and	•	N/A
	geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support
	appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and
	metallurgical studies.
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core
	(or costean, channel, etc.) photography.
	• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections
	logged.
*Sub-sampling*	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all	•	Information relating to historical results relies on data contained in reports submitted
*techniques*	core taken.		to the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines as part of the
*and sample*	• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc.		Company Report System attaching to the grant of Exploration Permits.
*preparation*	and whether sampled wet or dry.	•	The sampling techniques, where reported, used standard industry approaches.
	• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness	•	Assaying of samples was completed by commercial laboratory methods that were
	of the sample preparation technique.		appropriate at the time the samples were collected.
	• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling	•	Whilst it is not possible to determine the reliability of historical assay results, no issues
	stages to maximise representivity of samples.		arose during compilation and interpretation of the results that would suggest that the
	• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative		assay results were not reasonable.
	of the in situ material collected, including for instance results
	for field duplicate/second-half sampling.
	• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the
	material being sampled.
*Quality of*	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	•	As reported above, assaying of samples was completed by commercial laboratory
*assay data and*	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is		methods that were appropriate at the time the samples were collected.
*laboratory*	considered partial or total.
*tests*	• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF
	instruments, etc., the parameters used in determining the
	analysis including instrument make and model, reading times,
	calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards,
	blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether
	acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision
	have been established.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 12

Superior Resources Limited

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
*Verification of*	• The verification of significant intersections by either	• No adjustments have been made to historical sample assay data as there was no
*sampling and*	independent or alternative company personnel.	apparent reason for such adjustment.
*assaying*	• The use of twinned holes.
	• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data
	verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
*Location of*	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes	• Beacon Minerals Limited controlled exploration of the relevant area using a local grid.
*data points*	(collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and	Data has been compiled using the local grid coordinates.
	other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.	• The area lies within UTM Zone 55, GDA94 datum.
	• Specification of the grid system used.
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
*Data spacing*	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	• The geochemical soil sampling program conducted by Beacon Minerals was based on a
*and*	• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to	local grid using lines oriented east-west and spaced 200m apart. Soil samples were
*distribution*	establish the degree of geological and grade continuity	taken at 50 metre intervals along each of the lines.
	appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve	• The data spacing and distribution is considered adequate for the purposes used in this
	estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.	report.
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
*Orientation of*	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased	• No orientation sample bias has been identified at this stage.
*data in*	sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is
*relation to*	known, considering the deposit type.
*geological*	• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the
*structure*	orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have
	introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and
	reported if material.
*Sample*	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	• Unknown.
*security*
*Audits or*	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques	• No audits or reviews of the sampling techniques and data have been undertaken to
*reviews*	and data.	date.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 13

Superior Resources Limited

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
*Mineral*	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership	• The areas reported lie within Exploration Permits for Minerals 18987 and 26165, each
*tenement and*	including agreements or material issues with third parties such	held 100% by Superior.
*land tenure*	as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title	• Superior holds much of the surrounding area under granted exploration permits.
*status*	interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and	• Superior has agreements or other appropriate arrangements in place with landholders
	environmental settings.	and native title parties with respect to work in the area.
	• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along	• No regulatory impediments affect the relevant tenements or the ability of Superior to
	with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate	operate on the tenements.
	in the area.
*Exploration*	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other	• The primary data used in this report was generated by Beacon Minerals Limited.
*done by other*	parties.	• All of the historical drilling reported in this report has been completed and reported in
*parties*		accordance with the current regulatory regime.
*Geology*	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	• Insufficient information at this stage.
*Drill hole*	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of	• N/A
*Information*	the exploration results including a tabulation of the following
	information for all Material drill holes:
	`o` easting and northing of the drill hole collar
	`o` elevation or RL (Reduced Level) of the drill hole collar
	`o` dip and azimuth of the hole
	`o` down hole length and interception depth
	`o` hole length.
	• If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that
	the information is not Material and this exclusion does not
	detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent
	Person should clearly explain why this is the case.
*Data*	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging	• No data aggregation methods were used.
*aggregation*	techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g.	• No metal equivalent values are reported.
*methods*	cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material
	and should be stated.
	• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high
	grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the
	procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and
	some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown
	in detail.
	• The assumptions usedfor any reporting of metal equivalent

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 14

Superior Resources Limited

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	values should be clearly stated.
*Relationship*	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting	• N/A
*between*	of Exploration Results.
*mineralisation*	• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill
*widths and*	hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.
*intercept*	• If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported,
*lengths*	there should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. ‘down
	_hole length, true width not known’). _
*Diagrams*	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	• Included.
	intercepts should be included for any significant discovery
	being reported These should include, but not be limited to a
	plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate
	sectional views.
*Balanced*	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is	• N/A
*reporting*	not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high
	grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading
	reporting of Exploration Results.
*Other*	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be	• N/A
*substantive*	reported including (but not limited to): geological
*exploration*	observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey
*data*	results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment;
	metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater,
	geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or
	contaminating substances.
*Further work*	• The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for	• Proposed further work is outlined in the report.
	lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out
	drilling).
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future
	drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially
	sensitive.

T 07 3847 2887 │ E [email protected] │ www.superiorresources.com.au

Page 15

AI assistant

SUPERIOR RESOURCES LIMITED Capital/Financing Update 2017

65848_rns_2017-12-17_b774f931-3034-4d76-830d-a87890ab06bb.pdf