May 2019
Developing Canada’s Next
Nickel District
Forward Looking Statements
2
This presentation contains certain “forward looking statements” within the meaning of “forward looking information” under
applicable Canadian securities laws, concerning the business, operations and financial performance and condition of FPX Nickel
Corp. (“FPX Nickel”, “the Company”). Forward looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to the
future price of nickel and certain other commodities, the estimation of mineral reserves and resources, the realization of mineral
resource estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital expenditures, success of
exploration activities, permitting time lines, requirements for additional capital, government regulation of mining operations, and
environmental risks. Forward looking statements are statements that are not historical fact. Forward looking statements can be
identified by the use of forward looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects”, “is expected”, “budget”, “target”, “targeted”,
“scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, “believes” or variations of such words and phrases or statements
that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will be taken”, “occur” or “be achieved”. Forward looking
statements are based on the beliefs, estimates and opinions of the Company’s management that, while considered reasonable,
are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Readers are cautioned
that such forward looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual
results, level of activity, performance or achievements of FPX Nickel to be materially different from the Company’s estimated
future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by those forward looking statements, and the forward looking
statements are not guarantees of future performance. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to:
significant depreciation of metals prices; changes in equity ownership; accidents and other risks associated with mining,
exploration, development and production operations; unanticipated geological factors; possible variations in mineral resources
and reserves, grade or recovery rates; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing on acceptable terms, or in the
completion of development activities and other risks of the mining industry. Although FPX Nickel has attempted to identify
important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward looking statements, there
may be other factors that cause actual results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurances that
such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in
such statements. FPX Nickel does not undertake to update or revise any forward looking statements that are included in this
document, except as required by applicable securities laws.
Technical InformationAll technical information in the corporate presentation was prepared under the supervision of FPX Nickel’s Chairman, Dr. Peter
Bradshaw, P. Eng., a qualified person consistent with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral
Projects (“NI 43-101”).
FPX’s Decar Nickel District is one of the world’s best
development-stage nickel projects
3
● Low Projected Costs
➢ Potential for lowest quartile
operating costs (US$3.13/lb)
➢ Low capital intensity compared to
recent global nickel mines
● Modest Enviro Footprint
➢ Non acid-generating host rock
➢ No toxic heavy-metal leaching
➢ Benign tailings with significant
potential for CO2 capture
● Large Resource, Long Life
➢ Projected to be among world’s 10
largest nickel mines by annual output
➢ 24-year mine life with significant
expansion potential
● Excellent Location
➢ Located 80 km west of Mt. Milligan
mine (first production 2013) in BC
➢ Supportive local relationships
➢ Close proximity to power and rail
The Case for Nickel
Data Source: Scotiabank January 2019 Commodity Price Outlook4
$2.00
$4.00
$6.00
$8.00
$10.00
$12.00
$14.00
$16.00
$18.00
$20.00
(150)
(100)
(50)
-
50
100
150
200
250
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
US
$ /
lb
00
0s T
on
ne
s
Global Refined Nickel Supply/Demand and Price
Implied Surplus/Deficit '000 tonnes (LS) Nominal LME Cash Prices US$/lb (RS)
Forecast
April 2016 to April 2019 – FPX vs. nickel performance
5
FPX – Leverage to the Nickel Price
BCOMNITR = Bloomberg Nickel Sub-index Total Return, a single commodity sub-index
composed of futures contracts on nickel
FPX has extremely low market value compared to other exploration- and
development-stage nickel companies, suggesting greater potential upside
6
FPX – Deep Value Nickel Opportunity
* Nickel equivalent based on published resources and/or reserves
Source: Haywood Securities (August 2018), PCF Capital Group (June 2018)
$0.003 $0.008 $0.009 $0.009
$0.029
$0.044
$0.095
$0.141
FPX Nickel Corp.(TSXV: FPX)
Cassini ResourcesLtd. (ASX: CZI)
Rox ResourcesLimited (ASX: RXL)
Pure Nickel Inc.(TSXV: NIC)
RNC Minerals(TSX: RNX)
Poseidon NickelLimited
(ASX: POS)
Duketon MiningLtd. (ASX: DKM)
Sama ResourcesInc.
(TSXV: SME)
Relative Market Valuation
Enterprise Value per lb Nickel equivalent (USD)
7
Decar Nickel District – Ownership History
November 2009
Execution of option agreement with
Cliffs Natural Resources Inc.
2010 to 2013
Cliffs expenditures of US $22 million
toward completion of PEA in 2013,
establishing 60% project ownership
August 2014
Cliffs announces intention to divest
all non-core assets, including 60% Decar interest
November 2015
FPX Nickel re-establishes 100% project ownership via payment of US $4.75 million to
Cliffs
Decar Nickel DistrictExcellent Location – British Columbia
● Road
accessible
● 5 km to rail
line
● 100 km to
provincial
power grid
8
9
Decar Nickel District (245 km2)
1. DTR = Davis Tube
Recoverable Nickel
2. “Nickel in alloy” selective
assay method
3. Per 2013 PEA (see page 15
of this presentation)
B Target• 1 hole drilled, 1.7 km from Sid
• 263m of 0.132% DTR Ni 1
• Open along strike and at depth
Sid Target• 2 holes drilled, 320m apart
• 282m of 0.143% Ni in alloy 2
• 163m of 0.126% Ni in alloy 2
• Open along strike and at depth
Van Target• Drill-ready target
• Surface samples up to
0.16% DTR Ni 1
• Exploration target ~3 km2
Baptiste Deposit (2013 PEA)• 30,000 metres drilled
• LOM average head grade 0.118% DTR Ni1,3
• Southeast Zone expanded in 2017 drilling
(see page 9 of this presentation)
10
Decar Nickel District Exploration Upside
Baptiste Deposit
Van Target
Sid Target
B Target
● Southeast Zone: Higher grade near-surface zone measuring 1,000 metres east-west by up to 600 metres wide
● Deposit remains open to southeast, northwest & northeast and at depth 11
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste Deposit
12
Baptiste Deposit – 2017 Stepout Drilling
Southeast Zone (shaded area on map)
● Measures 1,000 metres east-west by up to 600 metres wide
● High-grade, near-surface potential for starter pit
● Table above shows average grade for holes clustered in Southeast Zone
Comments
2010-1 3 321 318 0.145
2010-7 3 71 68 0.13
2011-5 45 303 258 0.145
2011-7 51 304 253 0.163
2012-36 31.1 600.1 563 0.156 Excludes 5.7 m dike
2012-37 64 600 494.9 0.147 Excludes 8.2 m and 33m dike
sequence
2012-39 38.2 594.1 552.7 0.153 Excludes 3.1 m dike
2012-40 33 588 549.9 0.153 Excludes 5.1 m dike
2012-43 33.2 600 508.1 0.151 Excludes 22m, 9m, 14.2 m, 3.2m
& 9.9 m dikes and minor wall
rock
2012-46 28.6 600.1 487.4 0.15 Excludes 20m, 8m, 14m, 12m &
11m dikes and < 0.1% DTR Ni
intervals
2012-50 34.5 229 194.5 0.147
2012-55 106 569.7 456.2 0.158 Excludes 7.4 m dike
2017-63 73 390 317 0.121 Excludes 4 m, 5 m, 25 m, 2 m,
1m, 1m and 1m dikes
2017-65 29 351 322 0.131 Excludes 1 m, 8 m, 1m and 2 m
dikes
2017-67 55 349 294 0.151 Excludes 9 m and 1m dikes
2017-68 26 172 146 0.128 Excludes 1.2 m dike
Hole
Intersections DTR Nickel
(%)From To Length
13
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste Deposit2018 Mineral Resource Estimate
* Davis Tube Recoverable Nickel”; 0.06%
cut-off
2018 estimate dated February 26, 2018 by
GeoSim Services Inc. Mineral resources
reported in relation to a conceptual pit
shell, at a cut-off grade of 0.06% DTR Ni
inside a resource shell based on a nickel
price of US$6.00/lb.
2018 resource estimate report will be filed
under the Company’s SEDAR profile
within 45 days of February 26, 2018. 2013
resource estimate report filed on SEDAR
on March 21, 2013.
Mineral resources which are not mineral
reserves do not have demonstrated
economic viability. Inferred mineral
resources have a high degree of
uncertainty as to their existence, and a
great uncertainty as to their economic and
legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that
all or any part of an Inferred Resource will
ever be upgraded to a higher category.
Comparing 2018 vs. 2013 Mineral Resource Estimate (see notes above)
- More refined model than previous iteration with new robust geological model
- Increased level of confidence (59% increase in indicated tonnage)
- Similar total tonnage and grade using significantly lower Ni price assumption
(US$6.00/lb in 2018 model vs. US$9.39/lb in 2013 model)
(% Ni) (Tonnes Ni) (Pounds Ni)
Indicated 1,842,645,000 0.123 2,271,000 5,007,133,000
Inferred 390,788,000 0.115 448,000 988,111,000
Category Tonnes
Davis Tube Recoverable (“DTR”)
Nickel Content *
TonnesDTR Ni
Grade (%)Tonnes
DTR Ni
Grade (%)
0.02 1,906,630,000 0.121 504,880,000 0.097
0.04 1,889,612,000 0.121 434,287,000 0.108
0.06 1,842,645,000 0.123 390,788,000 0.115
0.08 1,746,351,000 0.126 334,757,000 0.122
0.10 1,526,532,000 0.131 272,280,000 0.130
Cut-off Grade
(DTR Ni %)
Indicated Inferred
14
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste Deposit2018 Mineral Resource Estimate
- 2018 mineral resource model incorporates the results of stepout drilling
completed in 2017 in the Southeast Zone
- Potential to improve Baptiste mine plan by incorporating near-surface tonnage
in a starter pit to the southeast of the 2013 PEA pit
15
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste DepositLong Section View (image location below)
- 2018 mineral resource model incorporates the results of
stepout drilling completed in 2017 in the Southeast Zone
- Potential to improve Baptiste mine plan by incorporating
near-surface tonnage in a starter pit to the southeast of the
2013 PEA pit
• Van Target is
drill ready and
measures ~3
km2 based on
54 bedrock
surface
samples
• ~35% of
surface
samples in Van
Target area
grading over
0.12% DTR Ni
• Van Target
located 6 km
north of
Baptiste and
remains open
to the east
• Baptiste Target
was ~2 km2
prior to initial
drilling in 2010
16
Decar Nickel District – Van Target
17
Decar Nickel District – Mineralization
Formula Nickel % Iron % Sulphur %
Ni3Fe 75 25 0
Awaruite – Naturally-Occurring Nickel-Iron Alloy
● Targets are large-scale and near-surface
● Disseminated nickel mineralization
● Consistent grade and grain size distribution
● Highly magnetic
● Very dense (8.2 gm/cc)
● No sulphur in mineral or host rock
18
Decar Nickel District – Conventional Metallurgy
Simple, two-stage process
➢ Rougher magnetic separation
➢ Conventional flotation
High recoveries, high grade products
➢ 80-90% recovery of DTR Ni grade
➢ Ni concentrate grading 55-72% Ni and 25%
➢ By-product iron ore concentrate grading 58-64% Fe
Clean process, clean products
➢ Non acid-generating host rock
➢ Products have high metal content, low impurities
Parameter 2013 PEA 2019 Testing
Ni Concentrate Grade 13.5% Ni 55-72% Ni
DTR Ni Recovery 82% 80-90%
Iron Ore Concentrate Grade N/A 58-64% Fe
● Nickel – iron – chromium concentrate
● Can bypass nickel sulphide smelters for
direct sale to manufacturers of ferronickel
and stainless steel alloys
● Standalone smelting tests indicate
potential to produce ferronickel
19
Decar Concentrate Premium Nickel Product
Ferronickel buttons
produced from 2013
Decar concentrate
- 49% Ni
- 51% Fe
20
Decar Ni Concentrate – Marketing Advances
Metallurgical Testing Post-PEA
➢ 2013 smelting tests confirmed amenability to conventional ferronickel processing
▪ Stand-alone: FeNi @ ~50% Ni
▪ Blending feed to Rotary Kiln – Electric Furnace (“RKEF”): FeNi @ 17-19% Ni
Concentrate Market Testing 2014
➢ Demonstrated technical acceptability of Decar concentrate in existing facilities of six potential offtakers:
▪ RKEF circuits, either as feed to Rotary Kiln or blended with post-kiln feed direct to Electric Furnace
▪ Direct feed to stainless steel bath, after pelletization – needs additional longer-run testing
➢ Indicative terms for nickel payability ranging from 85% to 95% of LME Ni price
● 2013 PEA concentrate specs
➢ Ni grade: 13.5%
➢ Fe grade: 45% - 50%
➢ Cr grade: ~ 2.0%
● PEA payability assumptions:
➢ 75% of LME Ni Price
▪ LME discount accounts for off-
site charges
▪ No credits for Fe or Cr
● Payability upside a key target
➢ No analogues for product
21
Decar Nickel Concentrate – Premium ProductFPX concentrate to yield high payability given similarity to NPI & Ferronickel
Source: Canaccord Genuity, Metal Bulletin, FPX market test
“NPI gets similar or better payability compared to many other nickel products. The superior payability is achieved
through its suitability for stainless steel production. This is due to the product’s high iron content and efficiencies
in the stainless steel production process as an ideal feed without the need for further treatment.” (Canaccord)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Nickel sulphate (~22% Ni)
NPI (~12% Ni, ~85% Fe)
including Chinese VAT
Class 1 (>99% Ni, LME Grade)
Ferronickel (~30% Ni, ~70% Fe)
Decar Concentrate (~13% Ni, ~50% Fe, ~2% Cr)
Mixed Hydroxide Intermediate (~40% Ni, ~2% Co)
Sulphide Concentrate (~15% Ni)
Global Nickel Products -- Ni Content & Payability (% LME Nickel Price)
Nickel Content Nickel Payability (% LME Ni Price, 100% Ni content)
Highlights of Economic Results
Project (100%):
• Pre-Tax NPV (8%) C$ 1,125 million
• Pre-Tax IRR 15.7%
• Post-Tax NPV (8%) C$ 579 million
• Post-Tax IRR 12.8%
• Cash Operating Cost C$ 3.23/lb Ni
Baptiste Deposit – PEA Results
● Positive result : First pass proof of concept
➢ Indicates potential economic viability
● Significant potential for economic upside remains
➢ Targets identified by consultants, in-house review
March 2013 PEA: Economic Results *
22
* Note: The results of the PEA are preliminary in nature, based in part
on inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative
geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that
would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Mineral
resources, which are not mineral reserves, do not have
demonstrated economic viability, and there is no certainty that the
results of the PEA will be realized.
23
Baptiste Deposit – PEA Parameters
1. Assumes 8% mining dilution, with
zero grade material
2. Concentrate includes by-product
iron (45% - 50%) and chromium
(~2.0%)
3. 75% x 3-year trailing average Ni
price of US$ 9.39/lb Ni; no credits for
by-products
4. Federal: 15%; Provincial (BC): 11%;
BC Mineral Tax: 13% (applied to “net
revenue”)
✓ Indicates key target for
optimization in PEA
revision
Note: The results of the PEA are
preliminary in nature, based in part on
inferred mineral resources that are
considered too speculative
geologically to have economic
considerations applied to them that
would enable them to be categorized
as mineral reserves. Mineral
resources, which are not mineral
reserves, do not have demonstrated
economic viability, and there is no
certainty that the results of the PEA
will be realized.
Operating Costs
Mining C$ 2.86/t
Milling C$ 3.25/t
G&A C$ 0.80/t
Total C$ 6.91/t
or C$ 3.23/lb
Baptiste Deposit – Cost Metrics
● Low on-site operating costs
➢ Accuracy of estimates: + 27.5%
➢ Potential position in lower half of
cost curve based on
▪ Low strip ratio, simple processing
▪ Project site, infrastructure attributes
● Detailed capital cost
estimate
➢ Accuracy of estimates: + 23%
➢ 20% contingency included
➢ Sustaining includes ongoing
construction of tailings dam
March 2013 PEA: Key Cost Metrics
24
Capital Costs
Initial
Direct C$ 970 million
Indirect and Owner’s C$ 197 million
Contingency (20%) C$ 217 million
Total C$ 1,384 million
LOM
Sustaining C$ 763 million
25
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste Deposit Low initial capital intensity compared to other recent large nickel mines
$36,000
$53,000 $56,000
$60,000
$73,000
$79,000
$83,000
$92,000
Decar (Canada)
2013 PEA Estimate
US$1.3 billion
Barro Alto
(Brazil - 2011)
US$1.9 billion
Ramu
(Papua New Guinea
- 2012)
US$1.8 billion
Onca Puma
(Brazil - 2011l)
US$3.2 billion
Goro
(New Caledonia -
2010)
US$6 billion
Ravensthorpe
(Australia - 2011)
US$3 billion
Koniambo
(New Caledonia -
2013)
US$5.5 billion
Ambatovy
(Madagascar -
2013)
US$5.5 billion
US$ capital cost per tonne annual Ni production
Source: company filings
26
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste Deposit Low capital and operating cost compared to other nickel mines
Yabulu (Queensland -Australia)
Tocantins (Votorantim -Brazil)
Ramu (MCC - Papua New Guinea)
VNC (Vale - New Caledonia)
Ambatovy (Sherritt -Madagascar)
Weighted Avg. (ex-Decar)
Murrin Murrin (Glencore -Australia)
Rio Tuba (Nickel Asia -Philippines)
Moa Nickel (Sherritt - Cuba)
Baptiste Project (FPX -Canada)
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
- 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000
US$
/to
nn
e O
per
atin
g C
ost
US$/tonne Annual Nickel Capacity Capital Cost
Selected Ni Project Costs, Adjusted to $2017 Basis
Source: Wood Mackenzie, BMO, Decar 2013 PEA for capital cost and on-site operating cost assuming C$1 = US$0.97
27
Baptiste Deposit – PEA RevisionFPX Nickel will undertake Baptiste PEA revision targeting
the following upside parameters:
Parameter Description
Higher Grade Mill Feed Potential for ~20-25% higher grade resources in early
years of mining based on 2017 drilling
Optimized Recoveries Potential for higher Ni recoveries vs. 82% of DTR Ni
recoveries in 2013 PEA
Higher-Grade Ni Product ~65% nickel product vs. 13.5% nickel in 2013 PEA
Enhanced Ni Payability 85-95% LME payable based on market testing vs.
75% LME payable in 2013 PEA
Iron Ore By-Product Potential to incorporate by-product sales of high-grade
iron ore product
Lower Exchange Rate Current exchange rate C$1 = US$0.76 vs. US$0.97 in
2013 PEA
No Marketing Fee Elimination of 1% marketing fee (calculated on NSR
basis) held by former project partner Cliffs
28
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste DepositConceptual Site Layout (based on 2013 PEA)
● Pit Outlines for
Mining Phases 1
and 4
➢ 2017 drilling in South East Extension area to increase Phase 1 ore tonnage
● Tailings
impoundment
➢ Design includes water
reclaim and recycle
➢ Potential for CO2
capture and tailings
cementation
29
Near-Surface Consistent Grade
• Consistent grade with low variability
• Higher-grade near-surface zone for starter pit
Large Resource with Expansion Potential
• Baptiste Deposit can be among world’s top-10 mines by annual Ni output
• 24-year mine life with significant expansion potential at Baptiste and surrounding targets (Van, Sid & B Targets)
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste DepositTicking all the boxes
Conventional Open Pit Mining
• Bulk mining operation
• Truck and shovel
• Low strip ratio 0.17:1
Conventional Metallurgy
• Physical processing using off-the-shelf equipment
• Magnetic separation followed by flotation recovery
• Concentrate or pellet product grading 55-72% Ni, 25% Fe
• Potential production of by-product iron ore concentrate
30
Low Capital Intensity
• Low capital intensity compared to recent Ni projects
• ~US$36K/t annual Ni output (2013 PEA)
Low Operating Costs
• Potential for lowest quartile operating costs
• On-site operating costs of US$3.13/lb Ni (2013 PEA)
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste DepositTicking all the boxes
Premium Fe-Ni Product
• Potential to bypass smelters for direct sale to ferronickel and stainless steel producers
• 2014 market test yielded positive technical & commercial feedback from offtakers
Modest Enviro Footprint
• Non-acid generating host rock and tailings
• No toxic heave-metal leaching
• Benign tailings with significant potential for C02 capture
31
Excellent Jurisdiction
• British Columbia rated 2nd most attractive mining jurisdiction in world by Mining Journal (2017)
• Decar located 80 km west of Mt. Milligan open-pit Cu-Au mine (first production 2013)
Proximity to Infrastructure
• Decar is road accessible by main-line forestry roads
• 5 km to rail line and 100 km to provincial power gride
Decar Nickel District – Baptiste DepositTicking all the boxes
Excellent Local Relationships
• Signed MOU and strong relationship with Tl’azt’en First Nation
• Local community involvement and support for the project
Opportunity for Innovation
• Ongoing university research to assess potential of Decartailings for sequestration of CO2
• According to a paper published by Dr. Ian Power (BSC & PhD, Professor, Trent University), “the Baptiste deposit offers a tremendous opportunity for developing a carbon-neutral mine”
32
Skagway
● 50 km SE of Whitehorse
➢ 16 km from Alaska Hwy
➢ 200 km from Skagway, AK
Mich Property (Yukon)
● 2014: Two-hole, 873 m
drill program completed
➢ Both holes carry long
intervals of 0.087% DTR Ni
● Proposed Drill Holes
➢ 2-stage drill programs
➢ Track >0.08% Ni surface
samples to the southeast
and northwest
Recent Price: C$ 0.13/share➢ 52-week Range: C$ 0.075 – C$ 0.18
➢ Market Capitalization: ~ C$ 19 million
➢ Average daily volume: ~ 40,000 shares
Shares Outstanding➢ Basic: 146.0 million
➢ Fully Diluted: 160.1 million
➢ No warrants
Ownership – Issued & Outstanding➢ Management: 17.7% (21.6% fully diluted)
➢ Other large (> 2%) shareholders: 33.4%
Financial position➢ ~ C$1,100,000 cash on-hand
➢ ~ C$1,000,000 working capital
➢ ~ C$65,000 marketable securities (not included in working capital)
FPX (TSX-V): 3-Year Price Chart
(C$/share)
33
Share Structure & Financial Position
Management
● Martin Turenne – President, CEO & Director
➢ Executive with over 17 years’ experience in the commodities industry, including over 7 years in the
mining industry
➢ Formerly CFO of FPX Nickel from 2012 to 2015
➢ Formerly with KPMG LLP and Methanex Corporation
➢ Chartered Professional Accountant (CPA, CA)
● Chris Mitchell – CFO & Corporate Secretary
➢ Metallurgist and business consultant with 40-plus years experience in the minerals industry, including
senior executive positions with Viceroy Resources and Orvana Minerals; former CFO for Canterra
Minerals, Silver Quest Resources and Independence Gold
➢ Professional Engineer and Life Member, Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of
B.C.
➢ Director, Endurance Gold, former director of Orvana Minerals and Matrix Metals (AIM)
● Trevor Rabb – Consulting Geologist
➢ Professional Geologist with over 10 years’ experience in mineral exploration, including over 5 years
specializing in nickel-iron alloy deposits
➢ Formerly FPX Nickel’s Senior Geologist and Vice-President Exploration from 2010 to 2016
➢ Key player in exploration discoveries for FPX Nickel’s Decar, Mich, Wale and Klow properties
34
Board of Directors● Peter Bradshaw – Chairman
➢ Exploration geologist with 45 years experience with Barringer Research, Placer Dome and Orvana Minerals
➢ Key Discoveries/projects: Porgera, Kidston, Misima, Omai, Decar
➢ Member, Canadian Mining Hall of Fame
● Peter Marshall
➢ Mining engineer with 30 years experience in mine development and construction,
➢ Formerly VP Project Development, New Gold and SVP Project Development, Terrane Metals
➢ Extensive mine development experience in central British Columbia, including completion of Blackwater feasibility study (New Gold) and
development and early construction of Mt. Milligan copper-gold mine (Terrane Metals, acquired by Thompson Creek for $650 million in 2010)
● Rob Pease
➢ Geologist with over 30 years experience in exploration, mine development and construction
➢ Former CEO Terrane Metals (Mt. Milligan copper-gold mine, central B.C.), acquired by Thompson Creek for $650 million
➢ Former Director, Richfield Ventures Corp (Blackwater gold project, central B.C.), acquired by New Gold for $500 million
● Jim Gilbert
➢ MBA with 30 years experience in international mergers and acquisition and finance
➢ 20-plus years in the global mining sector, including senior positions with Rothschild, Gerald Metals and Minera S.A.
➢ Former Director, AQM Copper Inc., acquired by Teck Resources in 2016
● William Myckatyn
➢ Mining engineer with over 34 years experience in the international mining industry
➢ Former Co-Chairman and CEO of Quadra – FNX (acquired by KGHM for $3 billion)
➢ Director, San Marco Resources, Oceana Gold
● John McDonald
➢ Geologist with 40-plus years experience in international exploration
➢ Co-Founder and founding Director – Mineral Deposit Research Unit, University of British Columbia
➢ Director, Canterra Minerals, Hudson Resources, Independence Gold
● Martin Turenne
➢ President & CEO, FPX Nickel Corp. (see bio on page 34)
35
FPX Nickel Corp.
Suite 725 – 1155 West Pender Street
Vancouver, BC Canada
V6E 2P4
Phone: +1 604-681-8600
www.fpxnickel.com
Twitter: @FPX_Nickel
36