PROVEN? NOT YET!

Behind the confident marketing of Gonneville, some very important proof is still to come.

Chalice Mining’s language around Gonneville is becoming increasingly certain.

Investors are hearing about a metallurgical “breakthrough”, a simplified processing flowsheet, extensive “de-risking” and a flowsheet described as “proven”.

But Chalice’s own words reveal a rather important contradiction.

At Mining Forum Americas on 28 September 2026, investors were told:

“The flowsheet has been proven.”

Yet when discussing the eight-week continuous pilot plant still to come, Chalice management said:

“The proof will be in the results of what that shows.”

Both statements came from Chalice.

So how can something already be described as “proven” when the company itself says the proof will come from results it does not yet have?

WHAT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN PROVEN?

Chalice has undertaken substantial metallurgical work.

The company says it has spent around A$15 million on metallurgical development and completed approximately 1,400 flotation tests, eventually developing its simplified processing route and producing an approximately 8% nickel concentrate.

That is significant progress.

But laboratory testwork is not the same as demonstrating that the proposed processing system can operate continuously, consistently and economically under operating conditions.

Gonneville has never been built. It has never operated commercially. And its proposed processing flowsheet has never been demonstrated at commercial operating scale.

WHY THE PILOT PLANT MATTERS

Chalice itself has described the eight-week continuous pilot campaign as a final flowsheet and metallurgical “de-risking” step for project financiers.

That makes it considerably more than a ceremonial box to tick.

Continuous operation provides an opportunity to test how the proposed process performs over an extended period, including recoveries, concentrate quality, impurities and process stability.

A successful campaign would provide important further evidence supporting Chalice’s proposed processing route.

But those results do not yet exist.

If the pilot identifies material problems, further optimisation or modifications could be required, potentially affecting engineering, costs or project economics.

That is precisely why the test is being conducted.

THE MARKETING CERTAINTY GOES FURTHER

The certainty isn't confined to metallurgy.

In the same September investor presentation, Gonneville was described as an “easy one” for investors.

Chalice also said project approval was “not a matter of if, it is just a matter of when” and suggested investors could give permitting “a big tick”.

Yet major State and Commonwealth environmental approvals have not been granted.

In fact, Chalice itself acknowledges that permitting remains the “critical path” to its targeted Final Investment Decision.

Government support is not environmental approval.

Confidence in an outcome is not an approval.

And describing a project as “de-risked” does not mean its remaining risks have disappeared.

PROGRESS IS NOT PROOF

Chalice’s December 2025 Pre-Feasibility Study put Stage 1 pre-production capital at approximately A$820 million.

But Gonneville remains an unbuilt project.

The Feasibility Study, continuous pilot testing, offtake and financing arrangements, major environmental approvals and Final Investment Decision remain ahead.

None of this means the pilot plant will fail or that Gonneville will not ultimately proceed.

But neither should outstanding tests, financing and statutory approvals be spoken about as though their outcomes are already known.

There is a difference between progress and certainty.

Between laboratory results and commercial operation.

Between government support and environmental approval.

And between calling something “proven” and actually proving it.

Strip away the marketing language and perhaps Chalice provided the most accurate description itself:

“THE PROOF WILL BE IN THE RESULTS.”