1

The Artemis Cu-Au DepositA. P. Belperio

The Mining 2014 Resources ConventionBrisbane, 30 October 2014

Minotaur Exploration Limited | ASX: MEP

2

Cloncurry Cu-Au

This time last year

• Minotaur merger with BRW was underway primarily to gain access to the BRW Eloise tenements

• The $6M Eloise JV poised to commence with private equity partner GFR

• The best available AEM system at the time was poised to commence flying

3

Artemis polymetallic Cu-Au-Zn-Ag discovery was announced 31 July 2014.

• How was the discovery made?• What is it?• What are the plans going forward?

Artemis Cu-Au Discovery

4

IOCG - ISCG

IOCG Focus Areas

• Gawler Craton

• Cloncurry

Mineralisation Styles• Haematite-hosted IOCG

• Magnetite-hosted IOCG

• Pyrrhotite-hosted ISCG

Targeting undercover, particularly the highly reduced and conductive cover marginal to Cloncurry, necessitates a focused and selective geophysical approach

5

IOCG – ISCG Geophysical characteristics

IOCG deposits (magnetite-rich) (Ernest Henry, Osborne, Mt Elliott-Swan): Significant positive magnetic anomalies Positive gravity anomalies Strong IP chargeability anomalies Weak to no EM anomalies Broad alteration haloes

ISCG deposits (pyrrhotite-rich) (Eloise, Artemis, Kulthor, East Osborne, Lady Clayre, Cormorant): No positive magnetic anomalies Limited gravity anomalism Limited alteration haloes Positive IP chargeability anomalies Strong ground EM anomalies

Osborne

Ernest Henry

Kulthor

Eloise

Artemis

6

Cormorant ISCG

JOGMEC JV

• Several years of work on the Naraku tenements north of Cloncurry

• Successfully penetrated ultra-conductive cover beneath black soil plains

• Major Iron Sulphide Copper Gold system (ISCG) encountered

• 15km, 20+m thick, massive & breccia pyrrhotite, persistently mineralised Cu-Au-Co

MIN04 : 20m @ 0.2% Cu, 0.02% Co from 160m

MIN07 : 56m @ 0.1% Cu, 0.03 g/t Au from 186m

MIN10 : 72m @ 0.21% Cu, 0.02% Co from 414m

Cormorant

7

Eloise ISCG

Shift towards Eloise driven by:

• Recognition of the ISCG style as a significant and different style of Cu-Au mineralisation

• Understanding of different exploration tools required, particularly EM and AEM

• Requirement for shallower ground that would allow airborne techniques to be used as a more rapid screening tool

8

Eloise JV

November 2013

• $1.7M Year 1 Work Program commenced

Primary AEM survey (Nov-Dec13)

Ground EM follow-up at 16 targets (Feb-Apr14)

Drill test 10 best targets (May-July 2014)

9

EVT54

Late-time, Z-component VTEM image

VTEM target EVT 54 Late-time VTEM image and line profile

• VTEM target EVT54 of particular interest – 350m west of the Sandy Creek inferred resource (see slide 19)

• Outcropping BIF and some ironstone “gossan” had attracted some past attention, some historic EM, and “sniffs” of copper and gold mineralisation encountered

• EVT54 therefore became a priority target for ground EM follow-up

10

EVT54

Late-time, Z-component VTEM image

VTEM Target EVT 54 - Ground EM

• Ground EM at EVT54 confirmed a steeply dipping, high conductance body, from c. 80m below ground level

• Original plate model from the fixed loop ground EM neatly fitted between historic drillholes in the vicinity

• EVT54 recommended as the premier target based on conductance and associated gold and copper hits nearby.

• Drillhole EL14D09 successfully tested the target, named Artemis

11

Artemis

• Discovery hole 22m @ 3.02% Cu, 3.81 g/t Au, 6.64% Zn, 1.35% Pb, 112 g/t Ag from 157 to 179 m

• Two further holes 50m up-dip and down-dip

• Drillhole EL14D10 : 21m @ 0.84% Cu, 0.73 g/t Au, 5.06% Zn,, 1.85% Pb, 69 g/t Ag

• Drillhole EL14D12 : 24m @ 1.58% Cu, 2.12 g/t Au, 4.74% Zn, 1.13% Pb, 54 g/t Ag

• 122m vertical section drilled to date plus down-hole EM can “see” a further 50m incrementally

• Drilling suspended to allow new heritage clearance surveys, new geophysics, planning of systematic drill programs and Joint Venture approvals.

12

Artemis

What is Artemis:

• Blind deposit of late fracture fill massive sulphide

• Fe-Cu-Zn-Pb sulphides. Very limited alteration halo or host rock brecciation

• Steep, tabular body, structurally controlled. No significant magnetic or gravity expression

• Responsive to Down-hole and Across-hole EM

13

Artemis Drillhole EL14D09

166.6m: coarse, massive sulphides including chalcopyrite (yellow), sphalerite (black), pyrrhotite (bronze-grey) and calcite (white to pale grey) – no host rock brecciation.

Metre interval assay: 36% Fe, 2.7% Cu, 1.5 ppm Au, 6.7% Zn, 1.1% Pb, 111 ppm Ag

14

Artemis - mineralogy

Cu AuZn

15

Artemis – Eloise Comparison

• Mineralogical associations (Eloise after Baker, 1998)

Element   Artemis   Eloise   Major mineral    EL14D09        

Fe   20-38%   -   Pyrrhotite

Cu   0.2-8%   0.1-25%   Chalcopyrite

Zn   0.02-14%   0.1-1.0%   Sphalerite

Au   0.1-20 ppm   0.1-15 ppm   Electrum

Ag   0.1-289 ppm   0.1-60 ppm   Electrum

Pb   0.1-36,000 ppm   0.1-300 ppm   Galena

As   0.1-9000 ppm   0.1-500 ppm   Arsenopyrite

Bi   0.1-500ppm   0.1-100 ppm   Bismuthinite

Co   0.1-2200 ppm   5-750 ppm   Cobaltite

Bright whitish-yellow gold grains (or possible electrum) (2µm to 20µm) circled, mostly in pyrrhotite, some in and on margins of chalcopyrite.

16

Artemis

• Re-surveying of historic drill holes in the immediate vicinity allowed earlier mineralisation to be placed in context

• Rock chip sampling has tracked controlling structure for 400m north and 400m south

• New ground geophysics underway to aid drill collar siting

• Numerous similarities to the Eloise Cu-Au mine have been noted:

17

Artemis – Eloise Comparison• Mineralogical association, tabular parameters and structural

style at Artemis appear similar to Eloise

• Eloise comprise a number of offset massive sulphide lenses of short strike length (<200m) but great down dip extent

• Early evidence at Artemis similarly suggests late brittle structures exert significant control on mineralised slabs.

18

Artemis – Eloise Comparison

• Eloise had an original resource at Decision To Mine of 3.1 Mt @ 5.5% Cu, 1.4 g/t Au and 16 g/t Ag (Amalg 1996)

• Since 1996, over 10 Mt has been mined at an average grade of 3.50% Cu, 0.93 g/t Au. Mining currently continues below the -1300m level

• From what we currently know of Artemis – the first 3 drillhole intercepts and EM conductor plates neatly fit the Eloise mineralisation long section model

• Expect clarification as down dip drilling advances.

19

Artemis

A resource of 2.0 Mt @ 1.32% Cu, 0.30 g/t Au for 26,400 t contained copper and 21,400 oz contained gold at the Sandy Creek deposit was estimated by Optiro for Breakaway Resources in 2013 and classified by the Competent Person, Mr Michael Andrew, as an Inferred Resource under the 2012 JORC Code. See Breakaway Resources ASX Release 26 February 2013. Minotaur further confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in that announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in that announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed.

Relation to Sandy Creek

• New geophysical surveys underway

• Common surveys to extend north, south and east to Sandy Creek

• Looking for potential linkages to Sandy Creek and other historic mineralisation

• Sandy Creek inferred resource : 2.0 Mt @ 1.32% Cu, 0.30 g/t Au and open below 200-250m depth. A peripheral zinc zone to the south has not been properly investigated.

20

Sandy Creek mineralisation

Chalcopyrite + pyrrhotite mineralisation

12BERD119: 175.1m

12BERD119: 223.8m

Younger chalcopyrite + calcite mineralisation

21

Artemis – Proposed Work

Accelerated $6M workplan from Oct 2014 to Jun 2015

• Systematic drill testing at Artemis

• Along strike and down dip extent

to be guided by systematic downhole surveys

• Thickness – grade variation mapping

• 40+ holes, 18,000m, 2 DDH Rigs

• Metallurgy, petrology and resource definition

• Along-structure extensions to north and south

22

Artemis – Proposed Work

Accelerated $6M workplan from Oct 2014 to Jun 2015

• Systematic drill testing at Artemis

• Along strike and down dip extent

to be guided by systematic downhole surveys

• Thickness – grade variation mapping

• 40+ holes, 18,000m, 2 DDH Rigs

• Metallurgy, petrology and resource definition

• Along-structure extensions to north and south

• Connections with Sandy Creek and greater Artemis area

• Greenfield targeting: Drill testing a further 10 regional target

• Greenfield targeting: Deep EM along the Levuka Shear

Artemis Sandy Creek

23

Artemis – Proposed Work

Accelerated $6M workplan from Oct 2014 to Jun 2015

• Systematic drill testing at Artemis

• Along strike and down dip extent

to be guided by systematic downhole surveys

• Thickness – grade variation mapping

• 40+ holes, 18,000m, 2 DDH Rigs

• Metallurgy, petrology and resource definition

• Along-structure extensions to north and south

• Connections with Sandy Creek and greater Artemis area

• Greenfield targeting: Drill testing a further 10 regional targets

• Greenfield targeting: Deep EM along the Levuka Shear

24

Artemis – Proposed Work

Accelerated $6M workplan from Oct 2014 to Jun 2015

• Systematic drill testing at Artemis

• Along strike and down dip extent

to be guided by systematic downhole surveys

• Thickness – grade variation mapping

• 40+ holes, 18,000m, 2 DDH Rigs

• Metallurgy, petrology and resource definition

• Along-structure extensions to north and south

• Connections with Sandy Creek and greater Artemis area

• Greenfield targeting: Drill testing a further 10 regional targets

• Greenfield targeting: Deep EM along the Levuka Shear

25

This presentation has been prepared by the management of Minotaur Exploration Limited (“Minotaur”, ASX: MEP) for the general benefit of analysts, brokers and investors and does not constitute specific advice to any particular party or persons. Information herein is based on publicly available information, internally developed data and other sources. Where an opinion, projection or forward looking statement is expressed in this presentation, it is based on the assumptions and limitations mentioned herein and is an expression of present opinion only. No warranties or representations are made or implied as to origin, validity, accuracy, completeness, currency or reliability of the information. Minotaur specifically disclaims and excludes all liability (to the extent permitted by law) for losses, claims, damages, demands, costs and expenses of whatever nature arising in any way out of or in connection with the information, its accuracy, completeness or by reason of reliance by any person on any of it. Where Minotaur expresses or implies an expectation or belief as to the success of future exploration and the economic viability of future project evaluations, such expectation or belief is expressed in good faith and is believed to have a reasonable basis. However, such projected outcomes are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from projected future results. Such risks include, but are not limited to, exploration success, metal price volatility, changes to current mineral resource estimates or targets, changes to assumptions for capital and operating costs as well as political and operational risks and government regulatory outcomes. MEP disclaims any obligation to advise any person if it becomes aware of any inaccuracy in or omission from any forecast or to update such forecast.

Information in this presentation that relates to exploration results for Minotaur Exploration Ltd is based on information compiled by Dr. A. P. Belperio, who is a Director and full-time employee of the Company and a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Dr. Belperio has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity that he has undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (JORC Code). Dr. Belperio consents to inclusion of this information in the form and context in which it appears.

Competent Person’s Statement

Disclaimer

Disclaimer

Daughter of Zeus and Leto and the twin sister of Apollo. She was the Hellenic goddess of the hunt.

Artemis