Richard Stewart: Okay. Good afternoon. Good morning, everybody. Charl check we're online. All good. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, good morning, evening, those joining us online, welcome. Just before we kick off with the formal part of the presentation today, please just take note that obviously, there are a lot of forward-looking statements. So please note the safe harbor statement. Before we kick off, listen, I would like to just invite George Coetzee, our Head of Safety, perhaps just to share a safety moment with us. It is how we start all of our meetings in Sibanye. So George, over to you. Thank you.

George Coetzee: Thank you, Richard. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening to everybody online and in person. Thanks for the opportunity. I think before we begin the formal session, Richard has asked me to do an opening safety moment, and I'd like this opportunity to reflect on the recent Nepal flooding catastrophic incident that we have seen. I was reading last night that as of yesterday, 950 people have passed, and there was still around 4,400 people missing. And we do extend our sincere condolences to all involved, an absolute tragedy. What started as an unexpected rock and ice collapse rapidly escalated into a devastating disaster. Reminding us that catastrophic events often emerge from hazards that are unseen, poorly understood or outside our current experience. Within Sibanye, we have seen that approximately 90% of our fatal incidents are linked to our [ 18 group minimum standards ]. These are known fatal risks and reinforces the importance of rigorously applying our critical control management process, verifying critical controls, critical life-saving behaviors and critical management routines every day. These are all included in this fatal elimination booklet that has been signed off by each and every person in the company and contractors committing themselves to these standards. But there's also another important reality. Approximately 10% of our fatal incidents occur outside these known standards. And these include both in service and criminally related loss of life incidents, and we have seen of that of late in the company. These are the events that challenge our assumptions, expose blind spots and reminds us that not all catastrophic risks are visible on a risk register. The lesson from Nepal is that managing known risks is not enough. Catastrophic events often develop from weak signals, changing conditions and assets that have not been fully recognized or understood. So as leaders, our responsibility is twofold. Firstly, ensure our critical controls are effective for the risks that we know; and secondly, remain curious, vigilant and courageous enough to ask what are we missing, what has changed and what could hurt us that we have not yet considered. Thank you.

Richard Stewart: Awesome. Thank you very much, George, and a real reminder of the very volatile times we're living in. But once again, welcome. I think thank you very much for joining us today. It's a real pleasure to be able to share our results with you. I think just as a very brief introduction, in January of this year, we shared with the market our refreshed strategy. This was a strategy that spoke about how as a company we were going to create a future focused, high performing future-focused metals business. Today is not about strategy. But what I would like to do is just a brief refresh of what we presented back in January because what today is really about is how are we progressing on this journey. So just a quick sound bite. There are 2 or 3 parts to the strategy. The first one is the piece in the middle. That actually describes not what we're doing, but who we are as our business. It's our purpose, it's our values, it's our stakeholder ethos. That hasn't changed. I dare say that part of the company supersedes any management changes or any external events. It's who we are, it's what makes us Sibanye. So that hasn't changed. The left-hand side is what our short-term priorities are. In short term, we said a couple of years. That's strengthening the business fundamentals. And if I could just try and summarize that very high level what we mean by strengthening the business fundamentals, it's getting our operating margins increased. We all know how we do that, costs and production. We don't control price, but that's how we drive revenue. That's our operational excellence strategy. It's about improving our effectiveness and efficiencies through our operating model. It's about increasing our return on capital and enhancing management focus through simplifying our portfolio. And ultimately, we identified two enablers, looking at a systemic approach, a real enterprise thinking approach and through, I guess, what is the glue of our company, our culture, our performance culture of care, caring for people. If we got all of that right, then it comes down to we should be generating a lot of cash and how do we allocate that cash, our capital allocation model. And we shared with you, we had three priorities: shareholder returns, our balance sheet, reducing our debt and ultimately investing in the sustainability of the business. And if we got those fundamentals right, I think as a company, we've learned the best way to grow is to be able to be agile and have flexibility with regards to time. You make your best growth and decisions at the right time in the cycle at the right assets where you can add value that requires flexibility. So if we get that right, we'll have the flexibility to grow in a value-accretive manner, which is the key point there. But we also highlighted that we had a portfolio of assets that we already have within our existing portfolio. We don't have to go out and join expensive M&A sales processes. We actually have a portfolio of assets ourselves, which we could develop that have significant value to us, and that was our focus. So today, what we're going to touch on and really, I guess, hopefully show you is the three boxes we've highlighted, specifically around operations and margins, capital allocation and growth, how are we tracking on the strategy that we put out at the beginning of this year. Let me apologize upfront. I do understand there was a delay with our results going out from the JSE. Unfortunately, there were some technical issues. So many of you may not have had a chance to digest the numbers yet. I do apologize for that. Not much we could do, unfortunately, but glad it could get out and we can at least be on time now. But just to give you some of the real headline numbers, starting at the top with our first priority, safety. I do have a slide where I'm going to unpack that a lot more. But we've had a great safety performance, whether we benchmark it against our own history, against peers, how we're doing locally. We've actually had a great performance. However, we still lost colleagues in the second quarter of this year. And until we can eliminate fatals, we have not yet achieved our ultimate safety focus. We've had a spectacular run of commodity prices, absolutely. It has been a very volatile but a high price environment for the first half, but also a full credit to our teams with a solid operational underpin, highest revenue ever for the company for a 6-months period. So that's very pleasing. Our EBITDA more than doubled. I think what's relevant to point out there, last year this time, we actually had a big EBITDA kick because we, in the U.S., recognized 2 years worth of Section 45X. If we normalize for that, EBITDA was up 200%, almost 3x. But the one that matters to us, and if you saw that strategy, it was about cash and margins. That's what we can control and drive record net operating cash, a great achievement and solid margins, whether we look at EBITDA margins, whether we look at all-in sustaining cost margins, you'll see later, we are happy with where we are competing within our business, and that's led to the value. So we are declaring a dividend today. Charl will share that in detail. And when we look at the yields of that, it's certainly one of the highest yields in the industry amongst our peers. We've had a significant impact on our debt, which was one of our big objectives at the beginning of the year. And we've also managed to fund organic growth. And today, we'll share with you 2 new projects that our Board has recently approved in Burnstone and Mt Lyell. So a very exciting pipeline of projects that we've got coming through. But all in all, I think a 6-months period for which we are very proud and has certainly helped us progress our strategy, I dare say, a lot further than I imagined we would 12 months ago when we put that together. I do just want to touch on safety. There is a reason safety features in the introduction and not the operational sections because this is our #1 priority. Why? Number one, it's people. We are a people's business. Safety is all about people. The second reason is for me, if there's one measure to tell you how well your business is doing, it's safety. To get safety right, you got to have your infrastructure working, you got to have your people working according to plan processes and delivering, and you need people to feel like they belong and are contributing to the safety culture. So to get this right, you've got three metrics you can see in one. And I think this is why that continued downward trend when you look at our lagging indicators is so pleasing. We've been on a definite safety journey for the last 5 years. We can see it's reducing risk. We can see it's having an impact. We do still have a way to go, of course. But certainly, in terms of our historical performances and a lot of the improvements around us, we are very proud of this. Nevertheless, we had a fatal incident at our PGM operations in the second quarter, and we had one in our gold operations, also in the second quarter of this year. So having gone a quarter fatal-free tragically the second quarter, we lost three colleagues and our sincere condolences go to families and friends of those colleagues, Khanyile, Thekololo and Xalisa. A question we often ask, and we've actually asked this at a big industry safety day yesterday, do we believe fatal incidents are preventable. And I put one point on that slide that I'd just like to unpack because last week, we celebrated a significant event. Our Driefontein operations went 1 year fatal-free. The reason I raised that, Driefontein is the second deepest mine in the world, slightly shutter than Mponeng. So that means it's got intense seismicity. It's got intense heat, it's got intense water. We put 7,000 people underground through more than 50-year-old infrastructure every day through three shaft systems. Arguably, on an inherent risk basis, that is probably the most dangerous mine in the world, if you want to look at inherent risk. But we've got the controls, we've got the methods, and we've got the people to prevent fatals in that environment. If we can do it at Driefontein, we can do it anywhere else in our business. If we've got other mines that go for 5 or 6 years fatal-free, we can do it across our business. Fatal incidents are preventable in the South African mining environment. We believe that as a company, and this demonstrates it. I think the last point I just want to make is you would notice and George did mention it, we've lost 3 colleagues to safety incidents in our mines. We've also lost 3 colleagues to crime. Crime directly related to work. A loss of life is a loss of life. That is also preventable. And today, I want us to acknowledge those loss of lives. And I want us to appeal to all stakeholders. These are preventable. It's not something we can do alone, but we're committed to preventing it, and we're appealing to all stakeholders to work with us in addressing this epidemic in South Africa of crime. It must stop. Enough is enough. Ladies and gentlemen, with that, I'm going to hand over to the team, who will take you through the results and pick it up towards the end. Thank you very much.

Kleantha Pillay: Thank you. Hello, everyone. Good to see all of you again. I'm just going to talk through three very quick slides today. We'll cover off macros, the precious metals and then, of course, lithium, which has been quite an exciting market in the last couple of weeks. On the macros, I mean, the war in Iran has really resulted in downgrades to global growth forecasts for the year. And of course, the longer it takes to resolve the conflict, the greater the potential economic consequences. There's been limited flows of oil and other key industrial supplies like sulfur, aluminum and helium out of the Strait of Hormuz. And this, of course, increases the risk of shortages, leads to higher inflation and then, of course, impacts on spend and growth. Tariffs and sanctions, as you may have seen in the last few weeks, is back on the agenda. And that again impacts investment confidence and adds risk to the forecasts. It also possibly pushes out risk into 2027 as well. So we could see some further downgrades. Global growth for this year is forecast at 2.5%. The U.S. is proving to be fairly resilient at 2.3%, China easing a little bit and the Eurozone, unfortunately, remaining lackluster. Looking on at the precious metals, prices have consolidated after the massive speculative buying push that happened for both gold and platinum, resulting in record highs in January. In general, the dollar strength and the higher interest rates are usually a headwind for gold and PGMs. But encouragingly, the net Central Bank gold purchases have continued through the first half of the year. The market liquidity has also improved as both gold and PTM -- and platinum ETFs have declined. Gold lost about 2 million ounces in ETFs over the half, while platinum ETFs were down just over 0.5 million ounces as all the investors look to take profit. It's helped liquidity, and it certainly helped interest rates coming -- sorry, lease rates coming down significantly. Then on to lithium. Lithium hydroxide prices climbed to a peak of almost $28,000 a tonne in May, and it's the highest it's been since August 2023. From the beginning of April until the middle of May, lithium prices were driven even higher as supply availability was limited, largely by the Zimbabwean government's export ban. At the same time, demand continued to grow for batteries, particularly in energy storage systems and in electric vehicles. And we had cathode producers beginning to restock for this demand. Prices then fell back a bit on the resumption of supply and exports from Zimbabwe as well as a number of announcements and rumors of possible mine restarts in China, Australia and the DRC. In quarter 2, the price for battery-grade lithium hydroxide declined 9% and was averaging $23,000 a tonne. Today, prices are a bit lower, but still at $21,000 per tonne number. We expect these prices to decrease somewhat as new supply comes online in the second half of the year, but we can't foresee this dropping below the levels of 2025. So I think just in summary on markets, clearly, biggest risk right now is downside risk, and that is from the macro environment and also the geopolitical uncertainty. And I'll now hand you over to Richard to talk through the South African operations.

Richard Cox: Thank you, Kleanta, and hello, everybody. So I think two quick points before I get into the numbers. First of all, the South African operations converted stable delivery into real leverage this half. PGM and gold both printed high all-in sustaining cost margins, 44% and 32%, respectively. And together, they generated the bulk of the group cash. And second, we're not standing still in the portfolio. On PGM, we are putting capital into shallow infrastructure-backed extensions that hold a 1.5 million ounce underground production profile. And in gold, we are producing more surface ounces. We are funding the Burnstone project, and we're also taking a tighter look at what remains economic at our Kloof operations. So I'll take the PGM business first and then followed by gold. In our South African PGM business, production was consistent and in line with guidance, 790,000 4E ounces. It was 2% lower year-on-year, and that decline almost entirely from surface sources. Underground production, including or excluding Mimosa, was actually up 1%. Our K4 operation added 10,600 ounces or up 24%, which offset planned plant maintenance at the Rustenburg UG2 concentrator. And also at the end of the half, we had 15,000 ounces that were on stockpile at the half year mark, and that will be processed in the second half. All-in sustaining cost was quite pleasing at ZAR 26,252 per 4E ounce. It was 10% higher year-on-year, and that is the number to hold. Roughly ZAR 1 billion of the increase is royalties and higher basket, and that was about 60% of the unit cost move. The balance is inflation and consumables, offset by chrome and other byproduct credits. The chrome operating profit was ZAR 1.1 billion. All-in sustaining cost was slightly below the guidance, and I'll speak a little bit more about that later. Against the 67% higher basket, adjusted EBITDA was ZAR 19.2 billion. That was up 302%. All-in sustaining cost margin of 44%, EBITDA margin of 45%. Notional free cash flow was ZAR 10.4 billion. That was ZAR 9.9 billion higher year-on-year at a 54% conversion. Sending back at -- this is the operational leverage that we said the portfolio has when delivery is stable and prices move. In the second half, all-in sustaining costs will lift, lift because as our planned development and stay-in business capital step up, and we are managing that inside the guided range. Our K4 operation is doing what it was built to do, up 24%. Those are new lower-cost ounces of capital already spent. Chrome remains a material stream at ZAR 1.1 billion of operating profit. Volumes were down, and that was after the BTT plant stopped as planned in the second half of 2025 when mining, the tailings storage facility was completed. The remaining stream still matters, however, and chrome should contribute more as the UG2 feed is prioritized going forward, and this is very deliberate as we outlined in our Market Strategy Day recently. The Brownfields program is shifting the mix towards UG2, the chrome-bearing Reef. So chrome is part of the same quality of ounce plan. Total capital was ZAR 2.6 billion. That was up 4% against the full year plan of ZAR 8 billion. So across all reserve development, stay-in business capital and projects. So only 1/3 of the year at the half and spend does accelerate in the second half as stay in business and project spend pick up. At the bottom, you can see our brownfields project pipeline is sequenced. We have projects in execution, Siphumelele and Thembelani. That's existing infrastructure and continuity at Rustenburg and more mechanized mining. Western Limb Tailings Retreatment is our surface sources lower risk, and we are currently building out the chrome circuit. In study, a number of projects, East 4, Kopaneng, East 3, Bathopele as well as the Smelter. These are gated on returns, affordability as well as readiness. And the point is not to build everything at once. It is to hold about 1.5 million underground ounces a year, lift the UG2 mix and raise the mechanized share. All this without an acquisition premium. We're moving towards a lower risk shallow and more importantly, it's actually on our footprint. Gold is the same idea in a different shape. Mix and price more than offset a tougher underground half. Production was 294,000 ounces or 2% down. Underground was 9% down. Surface was 13% higher and is now 36% of the mix. That is a structural shift, and it's how the result held. Kloof was rebased in the second half last year as we reduced exposure to seismically active ground. Kloof 7 is closed. Beatrix lost high-grade access after seismic damage to footwall infrastructure. Very important to see the plant recoveries at Beatrix are improving on the maintenance intervention. Driefontein was roughly flat year-on-year. Cooke was up 11% on third-party material and DRDGOLD produced 2.5 tonnes of gold, up 10% on yield. Costs are up, and we should be precise as to why this is. Shaft infrastructure maintenance and winder upgrades to keep shafts serviceable. Additional voluntary shifts in a high-price environment, those shifts actually pay their keep. At Kloof, ore reserve development and stay-in business capital are now expensed because of the shorter remainder life. At Driefontein, water pumping cost is higher on electricity and additional fisher water. At Cooke, plant upgrades for future life plus double handling and batch feeding of third-party ore to improve recovery. Third-party net cost is also higher, and we all appreciate that because of the gold price is higher. So in gold, not a cost overrun story. It's planned work. We encounter these challenges, and these are actually around known constraints, and it leaves us with a far lower risk in the underground business. Gold sold was up 5%. The average price was up 35%. Adjusted EBITDA was at a record ZAR 9 billion, up 87% at a 39% margin. Notional free cash flow was ZAR 3.9 billion and cash generation up 267%. So the gold business in a nutshell, it's noted fewer underground ounces, but more surface ounces. Spend, we can explain shaft by shaft and a price that converted that mix into record earnings and cash. Delighted to announce that Burnstone is approved, a project of about 130,000 ounces a year at steady state, a 25-year life. Kimberley reef at about 550 meters below surface. The Board has approved $98 million for 2026. The existing shaft, decline and surface infrastructure already in the ground. So we are not buying a greenfield premium. This is reserve replacement and a shallower, lower-risk ounce to offset depletion from our deep conventional mines. Our surface gold business is already working, 105,000 ounces, up 13%. That's DRDGOLD plus our own surface business and reduces how much of the result depends on deep level production. The Kloof operation still has optionality. Remaining reserves are under assessment. Nothing is committed. Any additional extraction has to clear returns and affordability. We will not stretch the plan to chase ounces that do not earn their place. And at a price point of about ZAR 2.4 million a kilogram, we can look at that properly for life extension to about 2029. It adds 3 more years and also looking at including whether a hedge book is the right way to underwrite a specific block of work. So the value of the gold business today is the record EBITDA. It's the cash and the growing surface share. It's the transition to Burnstone, DRDGOLD and the Kloof assessment and the future we are all aiming at, is a shallower, lower risk, higher-margin gold portfolio. So thank you very much. I'll stop there, and I'll hand over to Charles.

Charles Carter: Thank you, Richard, and good day. I'm going to talk to the international mining and recycling business. I'm going to start with the U.S. PGM operations. Certainly, year-to-date, you've seen a resilient production in line with our guidance. We produced 138 kilo ounces of palladium and platinum. This was 2% lower year-on-year, but within our plan and our AISC margin came in at 12%. And our all-in sustaining cost when you include the 45X credit came in at $1,347 an ounce. That's 12% higher year-on-year, and that really reflects the planned development and the mechanisation investment now underway. Our adjusted EBITDA was 28% margin and an actual adjusted EBITDA of $66 million. That's 56% lower than the prior period last year, and Richard touched on this, which has to do with the fact that we booked a very high credit for Section 45X in the first half of 2025. So what you've seen year-to-date in the Montana operations is a 52% reduction in cash outflow to negative $28 million notional free cash flow. That's an improving trend of cash conversion, and it's supported by higher palladium and platinum prices, particularly in the first quarter of this year, while we use proceeds to fund our mechanization process. At the Investor Day earlier in the year, Kevin Robertson and Matt O'Reilly spoke at length to the mechanisation process now underway. If we look at our internal milestones on how we're tracking in the first half year-to-date, we've done a lot of work on mine development, so spend on that to get set up properly. We have successfully trialed mechanised bolting, a ZB21 Bolter at Stillwater East with very good results. We've done a lot of work on the operating model to set up properly for moving to task mining and team-based mining and incentivized in a different way going forward. And year-to-date, our AISC cost has come slightly below guidance. So to Kevin and the team, it's been a lot of hard work, and it's been really good work. I think if I look at the second half that lies ahead now, we have a number of critical steps in front of us. And probably the toughest one we're navigating right now is to conclude our union labor agreement. So we have two different agreements underway. We have the Stillwater mine and the Met in one union bargaining unit, and we have the East Boulder mine in a second. So we've been at this for the last 2 months. It's work in progress. I'm hopeful we will get a landing soon, but it is complex work, and it's a workforce that is having to look at changes to the way they do work, the equipment they use, the move to task mining and team-based incentives and an incentive structure that is looking at safety and it's looking at mining to plan and it's looking at ounces and it's looking at the movement of rock and the processing of rock, and it's got multiple metrics about quality mining and quality as against plan. And that is a significant shift from the legacy incentive scheme, which is really focused on the miner and tonnes broken. So it's a very important step to us to get right, and it's a key underpin for the future of this mechanisation drive. We've got work ongoing in the second half on infrastructure, upgrades to sand plant and control chutes. And we've got a lot of work around capability of our management and our supervisory tier. So if I look forward and we're getting that right and I ask what does '27 look like, we should be well on track with Stillwater East Mine now getting fully mechanised, and we will have East Boulders coming slightly behind, and that was detailed at length in the Analyst Day presentation by Matt with readiness and set up next year and infrastructure setup, ventilation upgrade and the like. And then from the start of next year, we'll implement a new performance management system, and we'll focus very much on work execution. And so if I roll that forward and we track in according to our game plan, we should be seeing by that point in 2028, a real step change towards the $1,000 an ounce. We should be seeing significantly improved productivity, improved stope availability and mechanised task mining now fully fledged. And that will all be about team-based execution and associated reward. And this really is about a medium-term setup for world-class ore bodies that have significant long-term optionality. So we have to get this right. We have to move down the path we're on. I think there's excellent work underway. And none of it is easy, but you'll see from the first 6 months, we had outstanding safety performance. We had mining against plan, while all of the change intervention was starting to land. So full credit to all the teams involved in that. If I turn to the Recycling business, which is led by Grant Stewart, and Grant is here with us today. This year-to-date is really about scale, integration and margin expansion driving really strong cash generation. So I think it's an outstanding performance by the team. And you will recall that this is a team that's just integrated 2 acquisitions in the last 12 months to 1.5 years. And what you're seeing in these numbers for the first time is really the wins that are now starting to come through. So 13% adjusted EBITDA margin, $164 million adjusted EBITDA and significantly strong cash generation that goes with that, so $103 million. And that's a 63% adjusted EBITDA conversion. What sits behind that is a lot of work on finding the synergies between the PA site, the North Carolina site and the Columbus Met. The Pennsylvania site really significantly increased volumes in the first 6 months, 2.2 million ounces gold equivalent metal produced. North Carolina, 0.5 million ounces gold equivalent metal and Montana on the autocats, 100,000 ounces gold equivalent. So year-on-year, that's a 142% increase in precious metals and coming in on a combined basis at the equivalent of 2.8 million ounces. So a really sizable business. You'll see on the slide the breakdown of the different metal components. But I think for the two small acquisitions we did and the quick cash conversion and the limited capital we have to spend, it's a fabulous platform that we will leverage going forward. So all credit to the team on that. If I turn to Australia, the Century Zinc operation. Here, again, you've seen strong cash generation, importantly, in a near end-of-life process. So this is not easy to do, and Barry Harris and the team, I think, have done fabulous work here. They're really working with the last year and a bit of a plan. And that is always complex work, and you have limited flexibility. They produced 45 kilotonnes of payable zinc production, 13% lower year-on-year. And that talks both to the limitations on the plan. It also talks to a very wet rainy season and the impacts on that, maintenance work and a couple of other things they had to navigate. But the production was in line with guidance. The all-in sustaining cost was at the lower end of the guidance range, $2,162 a tonne. And the all-in sustaining cost, given the limited flexibility in what they had to navigate was 23% higher year-on-year with production down year-on-year. So the adjusted EBITDA of $55 million, that's 54% higher year-on-year. And the average zinc concentrate price, 25% higher, but it's lower treatment charges, and it's really good contracting that really made the difference on that delivery. So this is about operational resilience, maximizing higher zinc prices on a near end-of-life asset, and I think really good work underway. $41 million notional free cash flow, which is 86% higher year-on-year. So really strong cash conversion there as well. Lastly, if I turn to Keliber lithium project. I think as you're well aware from the Analyst Day we had, we now have mining fully underway. It was initiated in February. We're starting to get the run rates we want there. We are navigating all of the usual complexities of a start-up open pit. So it's about the sequencing of ore. It's about dealing with slightly higher sulfate content than we expected in certain parts of the pit. That has impacts on how we look at our rock dump placement and our water treatment processes and the like. So -- but we're hitting the run rates, and I think that's all good work. We have exceeded our strategic stockpile built. So 218 kilotonnes mined, 186 kilotonnes stockpile to date. And that provides really the security for a controlled concentrator ramp-up. The concentrator commissioning is underway. So what the team has been working on year-to-date is really trying to get steady-state volume and volume throughput to the right levels, and they're starting to hit the numbers there. Now they're swinging into looking at grade improvement and quality improvement. So that's really the task in hand being worked as we speak. The capital spend to date is on plan, EUR 719 million, and that's within a EUR 783 million budget. Lastly, and again, we unpacked this in detail at the Analyst Day. So we've hit our internal milestone on Stage 1, which is about the mining ramp-up and we've exceeded our stockpile tonnage. So that for us is success. We're now busy on the concentrator ramp-up, as I noted, and that's really about now working on grade. And then once we've got that right, looking at the potential for early sales, but we will judge that once we've got the spec where it needs to get to. Stage 3 is really about the refinery start-up. So this is a late year decision. We're working on getting set up for that. It's really late year, it's about all of the cold commissioning taking place. And then there will be a judgment around what the market conditions are telling us about spodumene sales and about refinery start-up moving to battery grade over time. So there's a market-related judgment down the track late year and also a quality assessment of the ore that we have for processing in the refinery. But really, what that does is it takes you into 2027 and early next year with expected hot commissioning at the refinery and ramp-up. And again, later in the year, really looking at the decision to proceed to battery-grade product. So thank you. With that, I'm going to hand off to Charl to take us through the finances.

Charl Keyter: Thanks, Charles, and good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. So what does everything mean that Charles and Richard have explained? And let's pull it all together in the numbers. I'm really pleased to report on a very strong set of financial results. And it's not often as a CFO that you can stand up and report on a strong set of results. But today, I'm really pleased, thanks to solid operational delivery and supportive commodity prices to report on the financial performance of the group. If we start out with the highlights, Importantly, the strong operational performance was supported by favorable commodity prices. If we look at the PGM basket across South Africa and in the U.S., that was up approximately 70% year-on-year. SA Gold up 35%. And then as Charles reported, in Australia, the zinc price was up 25%. And against that backdrop, we remain on target to meet our operational and financial guidance. Adjusted EBITDA came in at a margin of 35%. On an absolute basis, it was ZAR 31.8 billion, and that was up 111% year-on-year. Cash generated by the operations, and Richard Cox spoke about the power of gearing. Cash generated by the operations increased by 531% to just under ZAR 21 billion, and that represents a 65% EBITDA to cash conversion. From a capital investment perspective, we spent ZAR 8.2 billion for the first 6 months of the year, and that was roughly split 60% on ore reserve development and sustaining capital and then the balance 40% on projects. If we look at the operational and financial performance, it resulted in a 216% increase in headline earnings per share. We were up from ZAR 1.90 in the same period in 2025, up to ZAR 6.01 per share. Earnings to cash, the conversion was 45% and then importantly, in line with our strategy that was announced in January, our gross debt reduced from ZAR 39.3 billion, which is the half 2 reference point of 2025 to ZAR 32.1 billion at the end of half 1 2026. That's already an 18% reduction in 6 months. On a net basis, this translated into a 0.18x gearing. And for those who have followed the story, this is a significant reduction from the tough periods of low commodity prices that we have managed to weather the storm. If we move to the financial summary, I would like to highlight a few key points. Revenue increased by 64% to just under ZAR 90 billion with almost 3/4 of that contribution coming from the South African portfolio. Importantly, this revenue growth of 64% translated into a 111% increase in adjusted EBITDA, and as I said, a 581% increase in profit. The strong financial performance also benefited the fiscus with royalties taxes -- with royalties and taxes increasing to ZAR 9 billion. And that was -- that is mainly the result of higher commodity prices and the higher profitability of the group. Total capital expenditure as reported, came in at ZAR 8.2 billion, but that was down 14% from ZAR 9.4 billion in half 1 2025. And that -- and the reason for that is we've effectively completed the major capital expenditure at the Keliber project. Pleasingly, the Board declared a dividend, an interim dividend of ZAR 5.7 billion or ZAR 2.01 per share, and that is at the upper end of our dividend policy, which just as a reminder, is between 25% and 35% of normalized earnings. The dividend yield implies -- the dividend implies a yield of 8% if we look at an annualized number, and that puts us at the top end of our peer group. But if we look at a 12-month trailing yield, we still come in at 6.6%, which also places us at the top end of the peer group. I think importantly, a big strategic lever for us has been addressing our gross debt. And you can see that the debt maturity profile has improved significantly following the refinancing and the reduction of our bonds. That reduction was $250 million, and we got that bond away against a tough geopolitical backdrop. So I was very pleased with our internal -- or the internal people that worked on that, but also our advisers that managed to get us through that period of turmoil. As you can see that the maturity profile remains very manageable and liquidity is extremely strong with headroom at about ZAR 48 billion, and that's roughly equivalent to 4.5x of 1 month operating and capital expenditure. Our financial policy is to also -- to always have about 2 months of available liquidity. So you can see that we're in a very, very strong position. I think the message I want to leave you with today is that overall, we remain very, very well placed to achieve our strategy of reducing gross debt by 50% over a 2- to 3-year period. I will now hand over to Ralph to take us through the organic growth in the project portfolio. Thank you, Ralph.

Ralph Lombard: Thank you, Charl, and hi, everyone. So I have the pleasure to provide an update on our group projects profile. Our equivalent ounce production profile continues to provide a strong platform for future growth. While production would naturally moderate over time without further investments, which will drop to around 2.5 million ounces over 10 years, our value-accretive project pipeline is positioned to support production, resilience and improve the quality of the portfolio over the medium and long term. Contributions of Keliber and K4, which is in this profile already provide an important foundation for this trajectory. As you can see, as this is a solid portion of the graph has grown, which now includes our approved projects, which is Thembelani, Sipumelele, Western Limb Tailings Retreatment and now more recently, Burnstone and Mount Lyell, it materially supports our production outlook over the next 5 years and also creates a solid foundation for our future projects, which is in that hashed area on top. All of those are mechanised PGM projects of relatively low capital intensity. The projects which are still in study phase will continue to be evaluated and sequenced through our disciplined capital allocation framework with a clear focus on the returns, affordability, readiness and strategic fit when ready. If we look at how our projects stack up, so on the left-hand side is IRR and the bottom is the project capital. All of you can see all of our approved projects demonstrate a robust return. And also our studies in future, we will follow the same principle before we approve those. We have shared basically all of the approved projects, which is in execution in our Capital Markets Day. So I will spend a bit more time today on Burnstone and Mt Lyell, which has just been approved by our Board. Starting with Burnstone. As Richard already indicated, it is a shallow mine for South African gold mining standards between 550 and 1 kilometers depth. Our guidance for this year is we will spend about ZAR 98 million of capital for project setup and start of recruitment. Capital guidance for the total project is around ZAR 6.2 billion and of which ZAR 3.5 billion is for infrastructure development. Just a reminder, Burnstone will create around 2,500 jobs by the time it hit steady state, quite a healthy net present value of ZAR 19.2 billion and internal rate of return of 36%. At spot prices, our net present value is around ZAR 29 billion, an internal rate of return of 45%. Looking at our buildup. So our expected all-in sustaining costs would be around ZAR 872,000 per kilogram and we expect to produce around 4 tonnes of gold per annum when Burnstone is in steady state. On the right-hand side, you'll see our capital profile with obviously the bulk of the capital to be spent over the next couple of years. So what makes Burnstone attractive? I think if we look at this, Burnstone sits with a substantial amount of infrastructure already developed. I think most important is our vertical shaft and our decline shaft in place. Over and above that is we have our TMM fleet available. So when we start mining next year, we can start that quite quickly. We will build up up to 2029 and create a stockpile for our processing facility to start in quarter 1, 2029. And obviously, after that, we will have continuous operations steadily building up to steady state. At this stage, we are targeting 2.7 million ounces, which form part of our reserve. With successful execution of Burnstone, that will open up the additional 8.9 million ounces in future. So when we talk about a 25-year life, that's the 2.7 million ounces you see here. It's also my pleasure, which we have not shared a lot of information yet in our Capital Markets Day. It's Mount Lyell. Like Burnstone, Mount Lyell also sits with a substantial amount of infrastructure. It's a copper gold mine in Tasmania. It's around the town of Queenstown. And I just want to let you focus on that picture. So in that yellow areas, so the top northeastern portion, you see Prince Lyell, Western Tharsis, Cape Horn and Copper Chert. Those are the ore bodies we are currently targeting as part of the Mount Lyell project. I think more important, if you look on the Southwestern side is the Tailings storage, fully permitted Tailings storage facility. So like Burnstone, again, we sit with a significant amount of infrastructure already in place and obviously reduces the capital bill, which we need to pay for Mount Lyell. Our guidance for this year, we would spend around USD 7.5 million for Mount Lyell, and that again, will go for project setup, start of recruitment and mobilization. Our total project capital to get to production is around USD 340 million. That attracts a net present value in the region of USD 550 million and internal rate of return of 20%. If we look at today's spot prices, that net present value is above USD 1 billion and a net present value of the region of 28%. Mount Lyell will also contribute to about 300 jobs when it's in steady state. If we look at Mount Lyell, I think this is quite a nice picture. You can see the old vertical shaft and waste room there in the center, and you'll see some disturbed ground right next to it. That's where our future processing facility will be. So we'll start with the decline operations. And then in about 3 years time, we will bring in the vertical shaft, which then will allow wasting to a concentrator, which will be right next to that -- we see that wasting area. We spent a lot of time over the last 3 years to do the feasibility and a lot of it was focused to engineer out the safety-related issues, which was identified with the previous owner when that mine was stopped in 2014. I think very important is, I showed you those four different ore bodies. So instead of focusing just on Prince Lyell, ultimately, we will also have Western Tharsis and the other two. That allows us to create multiple attacking points still relatively shallow before going deeper. Life of Mount Lyell is around 23 years. Another important point is so what liabilities will we carry. So Sibanye Stillwater will manage all obligations arising post 1999. Anything prior to that will be carried by the Tasmanian government. We also, at this stage, our footprint is basically all on disturbed areas for Mount Lyell, and we will maintain it like that. If we look at the production profile, we expect around 26,000 kilotonnes of copper, which will come out of that. In addition, around 16,000 ounces of gold and another about 116,000 ounces of silver, which will come out when this mine is in steady-state production. All-in sustaining cost is expected around $2.56 per pound. And like Burnstone, obviously, initial capital will carry the largest bill. And after that, we should stabilize in terms of capital expenditure. As already mentioned, Mount Lyell sits with substantial infrastructure. Our decline is already connected to where the mining workings will happen. We sit with the ventilation infrastructure. We sit with the water pumping infrastructure, which is important in this part of Tasmania, which is the high rainfall and established materials handling and logistics area. So our biggest focus is to get the concentrator built so that we can start to produce some product. 78.8 million tonnes of resource and 54.6 million tonnes of reserve. That excludes work we're doing currently at this stage on future exploration. What's also important for Tasmania, it will be a relatively clean mine. So we will use renewable hydropower. As already discussed, we will stick into our disturbed ground area and also it will allow us to actually contribute to the future environmental cleanup for Burnstone. And apologies, Mount Lyell. In closing, Burnstone and Mount Lyell demonstrates the strength, depth and quality of our project pipeline as well as a disciplined approach we are taking to capital allocation. Thanks. And with that, I hand over to you, Richard.

Richard Stewart: Awesome. Thank you very much, Ralph. And just into the last section of the day. Thank you very much. So I've got the pleasure today of wrapping up just talking a little bit about sustainability. I do this on behalf of Melanie, who is our Chief Sustainability Officer, unfortunately, couldn't be with us today in person, but will be online. But I dare say as soon as we mention the word sustainability, we all think soft ESG. In fact, that's something you don't talk about in parts of the world anymore. But I hope I'm going to show you that actually sustainability for us is very hard. In fact, is what I would argue Sibanye has been built on. We started a company with 5 gold assets that were supposed to close in 6 years. 14 years later, they produced their best ever cash profit that we have seen out of those businesses. We started our PGM business with mines that were due to close and retrench 12,500 people. Today, we're investing in 3 projects that will extend those for another few decades. I dare say it's the same approach we're taking to our U.S. operations. I've been asked on many occasions, why are these operations still going? It's because we can see a different way of achieving value out of a world-class ore body for decades to come. That's who we are as a business, that sustainability. But to be sustainable, we look at it in 3 aspects: business resilience, and I dare say that's what you've been hearing about today. Where are our margins, what does our balance sheet look like, how are we operating on a day-to-day basis. Portfolio resilience, what are we investing in? What is the business going to look like going forward? How are we optimizing our returns on capital employed. And again, I dare say, I think you've heard about some of that today as well as how we're optimizing our resource extraction at places like Stillwater. And then the third aspect is value creation that we call people, planet and prosperity. And all of that comes together in the ethos of our tree. But this is not soft. Let's go on to what this means from a hard business perspective. In January, we shared with you how we were thinking about capital allocation. And we said we've got a capital allocation model that first looks after the resilience of the business. That's the part on the top, sustaining our ore reserves and making sure the business has sufficient liquidity. And what's left over, we put into 3 buckets: shareholder returns, debt reduction with a target of 50% reduction in gross debt and then life extension or growth where we are focusing on organic growth. So at the first milestone, our first half years, how have we done against that? Well, I think, as Charles shared, very pleasing the numbers that we've produced, which has allowed us to progress the strategy a lot quicker than I think any of us thought we would, but we are tracking the promises we made. Dividend at the upper end of the dividend policy that we have comes in at roughly 30% of the cash that we had after operations. We paid just over 36% towards reducing our gross debt and made a substantial dent in our gross debt enhancing the resilience of the business. Investing in our own projects, that is lagging a little bit. That, of course, has to do with the timing of the projects. But this is why we remain confident that the projects we've announced today, we can comfortably fund over the next few years. With projects like that, there are always opportunities to look at some neat funding solutions at streaming options at various offtake options. These, of course, will be things we will explore. Again, is there risk mitigation there. But even without any of those, we are comfortable that we have the ability to fund the future growth of the company. I think when we look at the environmental side, two points I'd really like to just discuss today. Energy, of course, a key aspect across the world and South Africa as well. Today, we do have the biggest portfolio of renewable energies of most private companies in the country, but certainly of any mining company. We've got over 165 megawatts currently producing today. We see that going up to over 835 megawatts by 2028. So what's that in numbers for the business? It's more than ZAR 1 billion of saving in energy costs for us by 2028. It's a huge impact in terms of carbon taxes. These are real numbers on the bottom line. And ultimately, 50% of our power supply will be within our control. For anybody who was trying to survive as a high energy user 5 years ago trying to survive in South Africa, this is a significant relief for us as a business and I dare say relief for the country in terms of where excess generation can go. The next one I just want to touch on is water. I dare say, again, as a country, it's probably thing being discussed most I hear today, wherever I hear a crisis, water is on the list. There are lots of people discussing the water crisis. I'm not sure how many of us are actually doing much about it. The country needs to be aware we have a crisis coming. And I dare so, El Niño is just going to shine a big spotlight on that. From our perspective at the moment, we are lucky in that we've got our gold operations, which are very water positive. Today, our gold operations are 90% independent, water independent, 95%, in fact, at gold. Our PGM operations today, they are in a water scarce environment are already 42% water independent with a very clear plan to get to 90% by 2028. This is going to be hugely important for mining companies going forward to be water independent. This is business resilience. I think on the social side, again, not going to go into huge details there. We discussed this a lot, but the point I just wanted to leave us with today is we hear about social with SLPs. There's a lot more than many mining companies are doing, and we really need to be sharing our story better. From a Sibanye perspective, we have our foundation of all the dividends we pay, 1.5% goes into our foundation. We've invested hundreds of millions within our communities, largely infrastructure. We have our own community trusts where during times like this, our communities benefit significantly as do other stakeholders from what we make. And of course, multiple CSI funds, most of which go towards developing economies beyond our mining, entrepreneurs and supply chain development. Now what does this practically mean? Well, to give you one example, I was very fortunate, I think, privileged to spend a day two weeks ago with the families, the survivors of the tragedy of the Marikana event in August 2012. Out of that, what a day where you sit and on the one hand, there's loss and grieving for what happened 12 years ago. But on the other hand, some of the good that has come out of that, one of which was we celebrated 5 new graduates that came out of our 1608 Trust. Out of a trust fund where 138 beneficiaries have gone through school, many of whom have gone through tertiary education. Today, we have 29 graduates, doctors, lawyers, farmers, geologists, 13 of whom are employed at Sibanye. This is what we can do when we acknowledge our past, when we work together for a new future. This is sustainability. When we hear about E&Ps, when we hear about IRMA, et cetera, that's compliance. This is sustainability. This is the purpose of our company. So just in conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, very briefly, I think in terms of the guidance for the year, it remains largely unchanged. We have made one update to the gold operating unit cost. I think as you heard from Richard, we have had a few real drivers on that cost, much of which has been almost investment into sustaining that business for a few years longer, but we have slightly increased that guidance. And the only other two small changes is included roughly ZAR 100 million for each of Burnstone and Mount Lyell for the second half of this year as we kick those projects off. So in conclusion, I think just going back to my first slide, we set out a strategy at the beginning of the year. I think we were very clear in terms of how we are looking at capital. That was about both creating value for our shareholders, improving our business resilience and investing in our future. I dare say the environment that we've had over the last 6 months and once again, I think full credit to our teams for their delivery, we've been able to really fast track this and fundamentally strengthen the business significantly from where we were just 12 and 6 months ago. I think we've demonstrated the portfolio that we have. Our Capital Markets Day took you through the details, and I said it there, and I'll say it again, I still firmly believe we have the best PGM portfolio in the industry and one I wouldn't swap. The flexibility, the opportunity to develop that in multiple phases gives us huge optionality to the PGM markets going forward. And I dare say you've now seen us committing to investing in those as well as our Burnstone and Mount Lowell operations. And ultimately, we've been able to create the shared value that is why we are here as a business, both in terms of our dividends today as well as investing into our communities around us going forward. So ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. I think with that, we're happy to take any questions, Henrika, I guess, from the floor first and then online. But over to you. Thank you.

Henrika Ninham: Perfect. Thank you very much, Richard, and other presenters. Any questions from the room? Thank you, Arnold. Charles is on his way to you.

Arnold Van Graan: It's Arnold Van Graan from Nedbank. Three questions, if I may. Richard, the first one is for you. So when you took over this role, it was a few months ago or a year ago, you obviously would have had clear plans of where you wanted to be here today at 1H. So -- and you've given a lot of detail around that progress. But I guess in your own words, where do you think you are ahead, where are you on plan and where are you behind? So that's the first one for you. One for Charles on Stillwater. So you're looking at the incentive plan going through that. So two questions. The one is how confident are you that you would get that through? And then secondly, and I think more importantly, from my perspective, how confident are you that, that would actually drive the productivity and cost numbers to get it sustainable because we see these incentives constantly changing, and that's the nature of mining. But yes, how do you know or can you give us some comfort that this is actually what you need to make that work? And then a short one for Charl and a very important one, when are you going to get the Section 45 cash in the bank -- and I'm assuming that will help bring down that cash balance that you are pushing down, which are well done, by the way. That's it for me.

Richard Stewart: Arnold, thanks very much. Good afternoon Okay. Let me take your first one. Listen, I think where we are ahead without a doubt overall has been the cash generation. Listen, and I think, of course, we've had very supportive markets. So overall, what that's impacted positively is the balance sheet. So I think we set ourselves a goal of getting that debt down by 50%, the gross debt that remains the goal. We thought 2 to 3 years to really get there. In the current market, that could be quicker. So that would certainly be, I think, the areas where we're most ahead. I think where we are tracking well is in terms of our plan on optimizing margins. So this has been around business excellence, around operational performance. And I think overall, across the business, we're seeing a lot of stability coming in. We're hitting the numbers we want. And of course, once you get stability, you can really start driving those margins. So I'd say that's where we're on track. The areas that I think take longer than I originally anticipated to be honest, I think, is essentially changing the efficiency and the operating model of the business. This is something we've got a big business. It's something we've got to do cautiously. But ultimately, it's about being far more efficient, the systems that we put in place to be sustainable. And we are a company that's grown from the acquisition and amalgamation of 4, 5, 6 different companies. So getting that standardized across the business is something you need to do carefully in order to not disrupt the business. But I think we are making the progress we want. With the other one we haven't touched on today, but I should mention is simplification of the portfolio. I think the reason is difficult to discuss that in an event like this until there's a decision made on something, we can obviously announce that and share it. But we are getting quite close on a few, and I think the team has done great work in how we can simplify and realize value for some parts of the portfolio that are noncore, but certainly look forward to sharing more of that with you as and when we can when they are hard numbers. Thank you. Charles, do you want to.

Charles Carter: Yes, sure. Is my mic on? Yes. So Arnold, I think the key thing to understand is this is an integrated approach with multiple components that work at once. And I'll quickly sketch them and go to your question. But interestingly, your observation that incentive schemes come and go, what we find at Stillwater is a legacy scheme that's been there for 20 years. It is focused on miners. And as you're probably familiar with that technology in narrow seams, it's 2 miners to a stope. They do everything from drill blast, muck and hall, and they are heavily incentivized on volumetric numbers. It's not about the quality of the break. It's not about the cycle time of blasting. It's about the volume. And that's an agreement that has been laid up through negotiation over 20 years. So we are busy changing that, which is complex work, not easy or quick work. Now I think importantly, when you look at our miners in that mode of activity and incentive, they are exceptional miners. They are high capable individuals. They are incredibly well trained and they've done this their whole life. So from their perspective, why change anything, right? So that is the fundamental issue you have to navigate in a negotiation. They are working to plan and slightly ahead of plan as we've shown. But that plan is producing, as you know well, without 45x credits at in and around $1,500 at 2E ounce. And that's when they go in full bore, right? So that's the best we can do. So you have to fundamentally change a number of things to move that dial towards 1,000. One is to really look at your planning and have a very integrated planning approach, but it goes -- and you would have seen this in the Analyst Day, really the stope configuration. So you've got a vertical ore body. You've got different dips between Stillwater and East Boulder. Stillwater allows us to use slightly bigger equipment on bolting, mechanized bolting, which is bespoke to us as well with Komatsu. East Boulder has a different dip. So you have to use smaller equipment, otherwise, you get sizable dilution. In both setups now, you're going to get dilution, but you're going to get very much enhanced productivity and cycle time. So your ounce return is significant. But what underpins that is task mining, so not two miners doing everything and getting highly rewarded for that. It's an integrated approach between the planners, the drill and blast, the mucking, the haul, all the way through to the plant, right? So that full team incentivized approach is new for that operation. It's not new anywhere else in the world. It's not even new in the U.S. and Nevada, for example, but it's very new to that operation. So you still want to favor the miners because that's where your core skill sets are. That's where the history is, but you want a fully incentivized team. And then with that, you want -- we're not just changing mechanized bolters. We're going from 2 yard to 4 yard muckers. We've got a number of equipment shifts, which all enable much higher productivity. So we are confident on our plan to get towards 1,000 over a 2- to 3-year step change program. It is being introduced incrementally between the two sites. There's a lot of training that goes with it. The fundamental first cab of the ramp now that we've done the trial mining, which we did collaboratively with miners, and we've done the work management is both to land the incentive scheme in the agreement. Once it's there, we can work with that going forward. I sketch that it has multiple components, not just volume and break. That to be blunt, the miners don't like because they're doing very well with how they do things right now. So there's a lot of convincing to do. But ultimately, this -- without that anchor incentive done in a structurally different way, without the enabling equipment, without the changes to work management, without upskilling our supervisors, you don't get towards 1,000. You have only incremental gains on the current mine plan. So this for these operations is make or break for the future. But it's not a one-hit wonder. It's not a silver bullet. It's an integrated program that gets layered in over several years of change management. And we have to take our workforce with us. And right now, to be blunt, they don't like change. So a lot of work going into that. I think I have a very high regard for the steel workers as a union in the U.S. I've spent quite a bit of time with the national leadership, giving them the why, giving them the how, appealing to them to back us to make the change. I think at a national executive level, they get it. I think we still have work to do with our workforce. These are two different contracts still in negotiation. We can have bumps in the road. I don't doubt this for a minute. But the direction of travel, where we have to get to and how quickly we have to get there either makes this 40-year options on these ore bodies or 4 years because we're not going to vote sizable capital if we can't make these changes. And you've got capital down the road on tailings expansion, rock dumps and so on. And in the U.S., that's expensive spend. So we've got to get this right. We've got to take our workforce with us. I think there's a core that gets it. They are totally up for this. Any one of those miners who's worked in Nevada and elsewhere, this is well known to them. But it's a change from a way of doing things, and that way was not broken. It's a proud way of doing things in Montana, but you don't get towards the 1,000 without the systemic integration of multiple pieces now shifting. So does this keep me awake at night right now? Absolutely. But the road map is clear. The plan is really good. The leadership team is fully on it. Now it's about change management and getting people to go with it. And we've put a lot of change on the table in the negotiations. So it's not an easy one, the legacy negotiations have always been incremental additive items to a legacy agreement, and we're changing that whole model. So not easy, but work in progress.

Charl Keyter: Thanks, Charles. So in terms of 45X, about 10 days ago, we had our first interaction with the IRS. It was a team of 5, of which 2 were engineers. They confirmed that they are looking at the '23 tax return, which is the first year of the 45X credit. It was more a process kickoff, but the two engineers on the call already started asking some questions around process, our relationship with our refiner and they also asked if they can do a site visit. So Arnold, I don't have a time line. I mean no time line was agreed at that meeting. But I think it's safe to say that it's now in process, and we will update you as and when we get more information. We've also asked the team to look at are there other companies that have received the 45X and they are. Through the direct pay method, we know of a company called Corning that's already received $83 million back in the direct pay method. So I think it's really -- it's just a process issue now. But unfortunately, there's no specific time line.

Brian Morgan: It's Brian Morgan, RMB Morgan Stanley. Just a couple of questions. So let's do them all in one go. Just, Charles, Stillwater West, it's now out of the 5-year plan. Is it out even if we get to $1,000 in the next 2 to 3 years? Is that the right way to read it? Maybe another question is, since we last spoke at April, how have you seen the spend catalyst feedstocks into the recycling business? How has that moved? Have you seen any improvement in that regard? Charl, maybe a question for you just on that specifically is the advances now ZAR 7.5 billion, ZAR 7.4 billion of advances coming out of that now. It's quite a big number. How should we be thinking about the accounting of that because it's a lot of cash. So just some thoughts around that one. And I had a fourth one, and I've forgotten what it was. But I'll just leave it with that, if you don't mind.

Richard Stewart: Great. I think -- and Grant, do you want to pick up the recycling one there if that's okay.

Grant Stuart: Brian, good to see you. From an Autocat recycling perspective, I don't think we've seen much incremental move or the market size getting bigger. It's really just been moving the pieces of the puzzle left and right. There has been some slight incremental move in the market in terms of the pricing, but nothing that's going to significantly move the needle.

Charles Carter: On Stillwater West, so the track we're pursuing is we've got to get towards the $1,000 at Stillwater East before we go anywhere near Stillwater West. So it's going to take us 2 to 3 years to really show that we are heading bull's eye on that objective. Once we know we can do it and we can do it well, then we will have a run at looking at Stillwater West. But we'll look at it in the way you look at a new project, although we've got a lot of fixed infrastructure, we've got multiple different setups for mining. You want to know that you can go back there with a fundamentally different productivity structure and a different cost structure. And then you've got to look very carefully at how you sequence that on that legacy set of operations because it requires infrastructural upgrades and it can be very expensive if you do it wrong. So I don't see it as a full mine standing up immediately. I see it as probably incremental. I see the planning phase getting stood up once we know we're well on track elsewhere. So that takes you year 2 into year 3. And then it will be going back to the capital allocation discussion, it will be stacked in a rank of multiple cabs in the company looking to get capital and only the fittest will survive. So it's in the frame, but it's not near term, and you don't want it to go away. But you don't rush back there because then your whole cost structure changes, your CapEx changes and you're back treading water. And the whole objective to 1,000 is long-term palladium pricing is around $1,100. That might improve. But there's no radically bullish case on palladium long term. I mean it might be a conservative case we're dealing with. But you've got to manage to 1,100 and show a margin on that. And that's how we think about it. So you don't chase volume for volume's sake because on the mechanization plan, we can unlock real cash flow. We step up ounces incrementally year-by-year, but we get very good returns once we get those productivities up, and that's the objective.

Charl Keyter: Yes. Thanks, Brian. As you say, it is a big number. But I think importantly is that -- and you would know that -- I mean, that number moves up and down as commodity prices moves up and down. But I think -- well, I know that the team has done some really good work around that. So there's no risk in it for us because we either lock in the price -- well, first of all, I mean, we deal with reputable collectors. And the team has a very good handle on that. And then I think from a pricing movement perspective, that is -- that risk is ameliorated through either locking it in through hedges or more recently, we've put that metal consignment line in place. But that will continue to show up as working capital. There's unfortunately nothing we can do. That's the nature of that business. But I guess with a 14% margin and the manner in which we turn that working capital, it's really -- it remains a very, very good business for us.

Richard Stewart: 45x accounting. You asking on the 45x accounting?

Brian Morgan: No. And then -- sorry, just one more question, if I may, actually, Richard. Just on Mount Lyell to you, you're talking about simplification. Everybody is clamoring for projects at $6 copper. It's not big. You've got a lot of other stuff to do in your portfolio. Is this not -- is this a core asset really?

Richard Stewart: Yes. But let me explain, Brian, thanks for the question because that's a good one. And I think the way we got to -- the way we look at it is where can we create value. That's the critical question. So exactly, as you say, would we be copper miners competing in bulk mining in Argentina? No, that's not our business. I don't think we can add any value there. An underground mining operation in Tasmania right now, that's exactly where our sweet spot is. That's what we understand. So I think a couple of points to it. I mean if we just look at Mount Lyell alone, the numbers you've seen, the valuations that we've done it on the decision we've made it on is, of course, on the resource we know now. I've got to say when you go and look at an asset like that, I used to have a professor who said to me, when you're looking for exploration, you look for juicy plumbing systems. This is juicy. So the opportunity to expand that resource and make that into a much bigger project is significant. That really is a very interesting country. But in terms of a project like that today, I guess the question we ask ourselves is we did look at alternatives. Could we have sold it? Could we have brought in a partner? Could we have done some sort of offtake financing? The answer to all of that is yes. Absolutely, we could in this market. When you look at the value that we could generate from that asset by building it ourselves, it's significantly higher. And if you flip that and said if we had an opportunity to acquire an asset like that in a jurisdiction where we've got a well-established team on a mine that we understand that is our bread and butter underground mining, would we have moved on it? The answer is yes, we probably would have. And here, we have it within our portfolio ready to go. So absolutely, it is -- I do think the one thing that we will still look at carefully with Mount Lyell, as you saw, it's got some interesting byproducts on gold and silver. Of course, copper, there is a lot of interest in terms of offtake. Could there be ways to help finance this in a smart method with some of those byproducts? That's certainly something we will continue to explore in a bit more detail. But for now, absolutely happy that it could be a real value addition to the company.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you. We have no further questions from the room. We've got a question from Nkateko from Investec. Please comment on cost in SA Gold, excluding DRD. All-in sustaining cost now at about $3,500 an ounce. Is this the new cost price for these operations before Burnstone?

Richard Cox: Thanks for that question. So including DRD, we are at ZAR 1.6 million a kilo. Excluding DRD, we had ZAR 1.8 million a kilo. DRD is doing ZAR 1 million a kilo. So I mean, that does trajectory tell us where we also want to follow in terms of the surface business. So what is the surface or what is the future cost of the SA business? I think what's the trajectory? And then when we look at the mix, it's also quite difficult to aggregate. I mean, take, for example, our most expensive business. I mean, that's Kloof. Kloof 15% of gold production. Currently, Kloofs producing at 2.4. Can we keep it at 2.4 if we think we can keep it at 2.4, there's a business for the next 3 years. So if Kloof's with us, it's going to increase cost. Our best business is Driefontein, ZAR 1.6 million a kilo. That's 50% of the production. But what we see at Driefontein of the working cost, 25% of the working cost is electricity and electricity did go up by 13% with the regulator. And Driefontein does pump a lot of water. So it's a big question, what's happening with the Driefontein water? Is it stagnant? Is it increasing? And I think in the Wits basin, we are seeing water increase annually. So I do think in Driefontein, if they manage their production, which they are, we might see a slight uptick in cost. But that will obviously anchor the cost towards the lower level. Beatrix, ZAR 1.8 million a kilogram at the moment. It's not really a cost issue as much as a production issue. We are chopping through some difficulty extending life of mine below deepest level, but I think we'll be learning there and we will get better. So managing the cost into the future, what have we signaled? We've signaled costs for gold at the back end of this year within the range of 1.75 to 1.84. I think that does take into account some of the significant infrastructure spends we -- at the moment. Will that continue into the future? Likely not. We are responding to some of the infrastructure vulnerabilities. 10% of our business is surface. And Cooke at the moment is producing at ZAR 1.9 million a kilo. We see opportunity to grow that. But within those numbers is quite a big maintenance spend to prep that business for the long term. Cooke on the third party 3 years ago, there wasn't a lot of near surface 0.5 gram a tonne material around, and it certainly wouldn't have sustained ZAR 1.9 million a kilo. But at a ZAR 2.4 million a kilo price environment, there's a lot of this resources around, and we are investing in that business. And it's quite significant. In the first half, we put ZAR 50 million into Cooke we see an opportunity for the long run. So it's quite a difficult one to pitch what happens long term. There is a lot of infrastructure spend. I think that will go away. So I do think the cost pressure that we are signaling 1.75 to 1.84 has got a lot of investment in there. A lot of our businesses are like Kloof, for example, it's got a 1-year life, a lot of that capital is expensed. That's in the number. You all of a sudden have a longer life, assets no longer impaired, that drops out of that number. So I do think it's a good number for the near term. But as we see future potential of our Driefontein operation and the surface operations, I do think that cost inflation on that number certainly will come down. Rich, I'll leave it there.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you very much, Rich. And we also have profiles from our SA Capital Market Day that one can have a look at looking into the future for costs. The next one also from Nkateko. You are lagging your peers on dividend payouts. At what point do you think you will consider adjusting dividends higher to align with peers?

Richard Stewart: Thanks, Nkateko. Listen, I think -- so firstly, just -- yes, our dividend payout is obviously 25% to 35% of normalized earnings. I think if I compare that to peers, most are between 30% and 40%. So we're possibly slightly lower on that front, yes. But listen, I think we've been clear in our capital allocation model. So in that model at the moment, we're looking at that roughly 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 model. And that is until such time as we can get our gross debt down by at least 50%. And until then, I don't materially see that model changing. I think it is about resilience of the business. Commodity prices have been high, but we're also living in very volatile times. volatility, we know often proceed shocks. So listen, we are certainly getting ourselves resilient for what may come. But once that is down, that would be a logical point to revisit the capital allocation model, and that would be a discussion with the Board. But as it stands at the moment, I think we're sticking to what we said in terms of consistent dividend payouts, in terms of reducing our debt and investing in our business for the future.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you. From Enoch from Shanghai Metals Market also asked, what were the average PGM prices during the period? Did you produce Osmium? And how much mechanization are you doing in Southern Africa?

Richard Stewart: I think there's some quick answers to that one. We don't produce any Osmium. No, we do not extract that. So the average metal prices, I'm sure were in the booklet. I'm not sure if anybody has got them on hand. I think it was around...

Charl Keyter: Just under ZAR 44,000 per 4E ounce.

Richard Stewart: ZAR 4,000 per 4E ounce in South Africa. And in terms of mechanisation, I think, Rich, do you want to.

Richard Cox: Yes. So of the 776,000 ounces we did, conventional is about 60%, trackless about 30%. Our surface contributes 5% and purchase of concentrate about 5%.

Henrika Ninham: Liwei from the Dow Jones asked how much chrome was produced in H1 in that compared to the previous year? I don't know if Rich.

Richard Cox: Yes. Thank you very much for that question. So chrome was lower. Last year, we produced about 1,160,000 tonnes and this year, 950,000 tonnes for the same period. So quite a significant 211 tonnes lower, so 18% year-on-year. A big chunk of that 175,000 tonnes was because we closed the BTT concentrator. And that is because as we planned, the resource feeding the BTT concentrator completed and that contract completed. The balance is when we closed the BTT concentrator because the tailings facility closed, it's got a neighboring tailings facility. And that neighboring tailings facility is a younger tailings facility, so less chrome in the mix, still profitable, and that was fed through remainder concentrators that also lowered the chrome output. But we see going forward with the the agreement we have with Glencore, the technology we're implementing, the workarounds on the Roland chrome, we'll get back to you -- to better numbers in this back end of this half and then into next year.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you. Nkateko asks, please comment on the integrity of the infrastructure at Mount Lyell and any potential risks?

Ralph Lombard: I'll take it. Nkateko, thank you. So I'll start this. We're extremely fortunate that we had a care and maintenance team at Mount Lyell, since the mine closed in 2014. So the decline is in extremely good shape, and that also allows us to actually have a relatively quick ramp-up. Part of our feasibility study, which we started already in 2023 was actually looking at the rest of the infrastructure. And anything which would not deem fit will be rebuilt, and that's part of the capital expenditure you see. So for example, the concentrator is totally new. And then you also see that post capital implementation, we also will do shaft refurbishment of the vertical shaft, and we allowed around $74 million for that. But I think importantly is where we want to start mining, we want to get going, that infrastructure is actually in quite a good shape. Thanks to that care and maintenance team. Thank you.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you, Rolf. Steve Shepard says congratulations on the operating and financial results. Also commenting that Stillwater has been problematic. Apart from a few years, it has been either loss-making or marginal. On this basis, is the risk management time and effort really worth it? Is it core to Sibanye and the Sibanye assets and -- is the question he's asking?

Richard Stewart: Let me take that. Steve, thank you, and good afternoon. Yes, listen, I think it is. And that's -- I guess that's almost a point that I was trying to make by saying we're looking at this asset differently. So yes, you're exactly right. Listen, Stillwater historically has done exceptionally well in high-price environments. I mean it did for us. It paid itself back. But in low price environments, it struggled. And that's a little bit ironical given that it's by far the highest grade PGM deposit in the world by 5x, but it is due to the higher costs in mining in the U.S. That's simply the math around it. I think the critical aspect is if you are going to be in the PGM industry, you have to recognize that all PGMs come from three areas at the moment, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Russia and Stillwater. So having that flexibility of an operation that sits in a geographically different area, I still think is critically important and very strategic. Now does that mean we will continue to try and make an operation work at a loss-making level forever? No. Of course, there's a limit and there's a line that has to be drawn. And I dare say if we listen to Charles, that's part of the line we're drawing with stakeholders. We have a plan. We know how to get there. If that plan doesn't deliver, then at a point, we've got to call it. But we do have a plan that we think will deliver at 1,000. And I think we have a real responsibility to try and make it get there. If we cannot, there will be a point to call it. But if we can get there, that is absolutely the -- one of the best PGM deposits in the world. We're still 40 to 60 years worth -- 40 to 100 years' worth of mining if you look at the whole ore body. And I think we have a responsibility to try and make it work. So Steve, yes, I think it does remain core to the portfolio as long as we're in the PGM business, which we certainly plan to be for the foreseeable future.

Henrika Ninham: Thank you very much. Sashi Shekhar of Citi ask, could you please elaborate more on the increase in trade and other payables of ZAR 9.2 billion that impacted your free cash flow? And will it reverse in future?

Charl Keyter: Yes. So I think importantly, the ZAR 9.2 billion was a release of working capital. So that was a positive impact on the free cash flow. In terms of the overall level of trade and other payables, it's a number that goes up as commodity prices go up. So if you look at the same period for the previous year, there's one thing to mention is that we included the North Carolina site from about September last year. Which brings across its own trade and other payables. So that would not have been in the same period in 2025. And then as I said, as prices move up, these numbers also move up because of the way that we lock in the prices. So your question on whether it will reverse, if prices do come down, which is not a positive for us, you will see a release after a period of time. But if you ask me, I hope this number grows, which does then suggest that we get higher commodity prices. Thank you.

Henrika Ninham: Perfect. There was a second question on dividends, but it was similar, so I already answered. Thanks, Sashi. If we don't have any hands in the room, there's more. I think there's a caller on the line. Operator, Judith, if we can queue there. Thank you.

Operator: The next question comes from Ephrem Ravi Of Citigroup.

Ephrem Ravi: I think there's a bit of an echo here, but I'll push through nonetheless. So firstly, on Century, you're clearly kind of reaching the end of the life for tailings. From memory, there is a silver deposit nearby given where silver prices are and your balance sheet now having pretty much degeared. Are you kind of putting that project into the pipeline? And would that be a consideration at all going forward and diversifying your metal suite in precious from gold and PGMs into silver as well? The next question was on Keliber. Obviously, there is also a the gating of the lithium hydroxide project from spodumene to technical grade to battery grade. Is prices a factor at all that you're considering? Or is it more kind of customer availability and long-term contracts that are driving that decision?

Richard Stewart: Let me give that a try. I just want to make sure I got you correctly on the first question, Ephrem, was that with regards to the PhosOne project or?

Ephrem Ravi: Yes, perfect.

Richard Stewart: Ephrem, no, listen, I think we've been quite clear that phosphate at the moment would not be part of our strategy. That doesn't fit in with what we're looking at. So as you quite rightly mentioned, at the moment, Century has got about 12 to 18 months worth of mining left. And there, again, we are in quite advanced discussions with our partner in that regard as to how that infrastructure could best be used towards developing that phosphate project. But it's not a project that we would be looking to put any capital into. And from our side, that is how best we could realize any value from the existing infrastructure we've got. So that is one of those examples I referred to regarding progress on simplifying our portfolio. But no, that would not be one that we would be looking into going forward. And I think with regards to the Keliber question, let me give that a first crack, but please, Ralph or Charles, feel free to add. I think at the moment or the decision regarding turning on the refinery really hinges around three big things. So today, we're commissioning the concentrator. As Charles mentioned, we've commissioned the throughput portion of that. We're now looking at how we can optimize the grade. Once we have that up and running and grade being at the right levels, then we can contemplate -- that's one of the first parts to turning on the refinery. The second part to turning it on will be what commodity markets are doing, what lithium markets are doing. The reason why that is important to us is if you do get a collapse in lithium prices and essentially, if China wanted to manipulate prices by bringing a lot of supply online, you can put a mine and a concentrator on care and maintenance quite safely and at a relatively acceptable cost. You do not want to put a refinery on to care and maintenance. Those are big chemistry sets. So once we turn that on, that's one you want to run consistently for an extended period of time. So we will assess the market and assess the concentrate. If we do not turn on the refinery, then we have the option of setting the spodumene concentrate. I hope that, that addressed the question.

Henrika Ninham: I think that concludes it, if you want to...

Richard Stewart: Wonderful. Well, thank you very much, everybody, again for joining us today. I think a pleasure to have you all here today. We look forward to seeing you soon. Please enjoy the rest of the afternoon. Thank you very much.