AIC Mines LimitedA

Lifecycle Milestones

1. Permit granted

   May 2024 · Mining lease for the Jericho Copper Mine approved for grant by Queensland's Minister for Resources and Critical Minerals and granted by the Department of Resources, commencing 1 June 2024. · Source
2. Construction decision (FID)

   May 2024 · AIC Mines board approved development of the Jericho copper deposit via a 3km underground link drive from the Eloise decline -- an approximately A$50 million development decision. · Source
3. Construction start

   Jun 2024 · Development of the Jericho link drive (3km underground drive connecting the Jericho deposit to the Eloise decline, 125m below surface) commenced June 2024, delivered by PYBAR Mining Services. · Source
4. First pour / production

   Reached — date not disclosed · Eloise Copper Mine commissioned in 1996 (year-only precision -- exact month/day not disclosed in available sources), under prior owner Amalg Resources NL, predating AIC Mines' Nov 2021 acquisition of the project. [Task #697 chronology ruling, 2026-08-25] NOT A DATE ERROR -- READ THIS BEFORE "CORRECTING" THE DATE. Task #696's chronology rules flag six inversions on this ticker (PERMIT_GRANTED / CONSTRUCTION_DECISION / CONSTRUCTION_START each dated after both FIRST_PRODUCTION and COMMERCIAL_PRODUCTION). Every one of them is the same structural artefact and none is a wrong date: this row and COMMERCIAL_PRODUCTION describe the ELOISE COPPER MINE (commissioned 1996, acquired by AIC Nov 2021), while the 2024 permit/decision/start rows describe the JERICHO copper deposit -- a separate orebody being developed via a 3km underground link drive to the Eloise decline. An already-producing mine plus a new satellite build under one ticker cannot be expressed in one five-slot chain, because MinerConstructionMilestone is @@unique([minerId, milestone]) with no per-asset scoping. Same shape as SBMI's toll-milling vs King Tut streams. Deliberately NOT expressed with disputed=true: both events genuinely occurred on the dates recorded, so there is no doubt to express, and setting the flag would break the enforced stage-production-implies-milestone-first_production gate. Flagged for MULTI_ASSET_INVERSION_EXCEPTIONS; not added here because that file was under concurrent edit. SECONDARY OBSERVATION, not acted on: the 1996 date is a PRIOR OWNER's (Amalg Resources NL) production, which sits awkwardly against the Hemlo/GSVR precedent that a predecessor-operator's production is explicitly not the basis for these rows -- unlike III/Mount Polley, where continuous ownership justified the original date. Worth a ruling, but it is a separate question from the inversion and re-dating on that basis would be a much larger change than this pass should make unilaterally. [Task #698 prior-owner ruling, 2026-08-25] achievedDate CLEARED (was 1996-01-01). Task #697 recorded, but did not act on, the observation that this date is a PRIOR OWNER's production: Eloise was commissioned in 1996 by Amalg Resources NL, and AIC Mines -- itself the renamed Intermin Resources Limited, a Western Australian gold explorer -- did not acquire the project until Nov 2021. That is the Hemlo/GSVR/CMCL/HSTR/ARG/ITR/SCZ precedent exactly: an asset whose production predates the current company's ownership under a genuinely different prior corporate name is recorded reached-but-undated, with the acquisition named in the note. The discriminator that justifies keeping III's 1997 Mount Polley date -- continuous ownership since before the date -- is absent here. Independently, this row's own note already disavowed its precision ("year-only precision -- exact month/day not disclosed"), and the 1 January value was a rounding artefact of exactly the kind Task #697 cleared on AEM/ABX/ELD/ABI/EU/SFR/PDN in the same pass. Two independent grounds, same answer. NOT re-dated to the Nov 2021 acquisition close -- that remains a larger call than this pass should make, and clearing the date asserts nothing new. NOT disputed=true: Eloise genuinely reached this milestone and AIC has operated it since 2021; only the DATE is not AIC's, and imprecision about when is carried by achievedDate, not by disputed. Consequence: this supersedes Task #697's flag that A1M be added to the reviewed multi-asset exception set. All six of A1M's chronology inversions measured a 2024 Jericho row against one of the two 1996 Eloise rows, so clearing the dates makes A1M SATISFIED on both chronology rules rather than exempted -- no rules-file exception was added, deliberately, because a structural exemption would have permanently encoded a defect that was fixable in the data. · Source
5. Commercial production

   Reached — date not disclosed · Eloise Copper Mine reached commercial production upon 1996 commissioning (year-only precision -- exact month/day not disclosed in available sources); AIC Mines has operated it since acquiring the project in Nov 2021 and has met annual production guidance for 3 consecutive years through FY26. [Task #698 prior-owner ruling, 2026-08-25] achievedDate CLEARED (was 1996-01-01). Task #697 recorded, but did not act on, the observation that this date is a PRIOR OWNER's production: Eloise was commissioned in 1996 by Amalg Resources NL, and AIC Mines -- itself the renamed Intermin Resources Limited, a Western Australian gold explorer -- did not acquire the project until Nov 2021. That is the Hemlo/GSVR/CMCL/HSTR/ARG/ITR/SCZ precedent exactly: an asset whose production predates the current company's ownership under a genuinely different prior corporate name is recorded reached-but-undated, with the acquisition named in the note. The discriminator that justifies keeping III's 1997 Mount Polley date -- continuous ownership since before the date -- is absent here. Independently, this row's own note already disavowed its precision ("year-only precision -- exact month/day not disclosed"), and the 1 January value was a rounding artefact of exactly the kind Task #697 cleared on AEM/ABX/ELD/ABI/EU/SFR/PDN in the same pass. Two independent grounds, same answer. NOT re-dated to the Nov 2021 acquisition close -- that remains a larger call than this pass should make, and clearing the date asserts nothing new. NOT disputed=true: Eloise genuinely reached this milestone and AIC has operated it since 2021; only the DATE is not AIC's, and imprecision about when is carried by achievedDate, not by disputed. Consequence: this supersedes Task #697's flag that A1M be added to the reviewed multi-asset exception set. All six of A1M's chronology inversions measured a 2024 Jericho row against one of the two 1996 Eloise rows, so clearing the dates makes A1M SATISFIED on both chronology rules rather than exempted -- no rules-file exception was added, deliberately, because a structural exemption would have permanently encoded a defect that was fixable in the data. · Source

Milestones are recorded only from a company's own dated disclosure. A milestone with no date shown is one we can confirm was reached but for which no date was disclosed — we don't estimate one. "Not yet reached" means exactly that, not that a date is missing. An "Expected" line likewise only ever reflects the company's own guidance (e.g. a study or permit decision targeted for a stated quarter) — most not-yet-reached milestones have none, and that absence means no such guidance has been disclosed, not that one is overdue.

A relative ranking of how closely this company matches the profile of juniors that have actually been acquired — not a probability, and not a reason to buy. Acquisitions are rare: only a few dozen significant deals happen a year across a universe of thousands of juniors, so even a high score here describes a long shot. The strongest signal the underlying research identifies — whether a major already holds a JV, earn-in, or 5–19.9% strategic stake — isn't tracked yet and is absent from this score.