Microsoft Word - pjn7895.doc

ABN 79 106 879 690

29 October 2014

The Manager Companies ASX Limited

20 Bridge Street

Sydney NSW 2000 (12 pages by email)

Regional Drilling Program at Wonogiri Completed

 Additional high grade zone intersected at Janglenggan prospect south of Randu Kuning with WDD067 returning 20.80 g/t gold and 13.4 g/t silver over 0.80 metres from 187.7 metres.

 6.90 g/t gold intersected over 1.0 metre in WDD064 at Bukit Piti prospect

immediately North of Randu Kuning.

 3.75 g/t gold and 24.2 g/t silver over 2.0 metres in WDD072 at the Kepil prospect

west of Randu Kuning, hole ended in mineralisation.

 Future drilling at the Wonogiri property will now focus on infill drilling at the Randu Kuning prospect to better define the measured resource within the conceptual starter pit area and also select drilling as part of an initial geotechnical evaluation program.

 Additional zones of low grade gold mineralisation were intersected at all prospect areas drilled. None of the quartz sulphide vein systems intersected have been fully drill tested and remain as viable future exploration targets with potential to provide

higher grade possible life‐of‐mine resource additions.

The Directors of Augur Resources Ltd ('Augur' or 'the Company') are pleased to announce further results from regional drilling at its Wonogiri gold‐copper project in Central Java, Indonesia. The drilling tested potential epithermal gold targets in close proximity to the main Randu Kuning deposit which is currently undergoing advanced scoping studies.

Level 2, 66 Hunter Street Sydney NSW 2000

Phone: +61 2 9300 3310 Facsimile: +61 2 9221 6333 Web: www.augur.com.au

Randu Kuning

Deposit Area

Plan map of the Wonogiri project area with the surface IP Chargeability map as the background,

showing prospect areas with epithermal type veins mapped on surface (red lines) and drillholes

completed as part of the current drill program.

Wonogiri Regional Drilling Program

A total of 22 Diamond drillholes for 3,641 metres were drilled in a regional program to identify areas of epithermal type gold ± silver mineralisation in close proximity to the main Randu Kuning gold‐copper deposit area that might have the potential for immediate resource delineation.

Attachment 1 below lists significant intersections for regional drillholes WDD053 to WDD072. The first 2 holes of the drill program (WDD051 and WDD052) were depth extensions to previously drilled holes and were detailed in the Company's ASX release dated

22 May 2014. Holes WDD053 to WDD060 were detailed in the Company's ASX release dated

22 July 2014.

2

Janglenggan Prospect Area

Located about 1.0 kilometre south of Randu Kuning, the initial scout hole WDD056 returned

3 shallow high grade zones including:

• 7.0 metres at 0.82 g/t gold and 3.5 g/t silver from 56.0 metres, including 2.0 metres

at 2.08 g/t gold and 10.2 g/t silver.

• 3.0 metres at 7.79 g/t gold, 9.0 g/t silver, 0.29% copper and 0.38% zinc from 70.0

metres, including 1.0 metre of 15.90 g/t gold and 20.7 g/t silver.

• 7.0 metres at 2.64 g/t gold from 120.0 metres, including 1.0 metre of 14.8 g/t gold.

A follow up drill hole, WDD067, tested the depth extension of the high grade intersected in hole WDD056 and intersected 20.8 g/t gold and 13.4 g/t silver over 0.80 metres from 187.7 metres. The drilling suggests that mineralisation is structurally controlled and adjacent to the contact between diorite and the diatreme breccia host. The high grade zones have not been fully drill tested and this area may warrant future exploration drilling to determine if any potential for a small, high grade resource.

Kepil Prospect Area

Located about 500 metres southwest of Randu Kuning, an initial scout drill hole, WDD059, intersected 6.0 metres of 0.83 g/t gold from 36.0 metres, including 2.0 metres of 1.1 g/t gold from 38.0 metres. The mineralisation is confined to structurally controlled, quartz‐ carbonate and sulphide (pyrite, sphalerite) zones in an argillic‐altered diorite intrusive host rock. A hole immediately east of Kepil, WDD058, intersected 36.0 metres at 0.28% copper from 25.0 metres.

The last hole of the drill program, WDD072, was collared approximately 50 metres south of WDD059 and intersected 2.0 metres of 3.75 g/t gold and 24.2 g/t silver from 148.0 metres, finishing in mineralisation at 150.0 metres. Further consideration will be given to exploration drilling to evaluate the host structure at depth and along strike to the south.

Wonogiri project location and major porphyry deposits on the Oligocene‐Miocene Arc.

3

For further information, please contact Peter Nightingale on +61 2 9300 3310.

Yours sincerely

Peter Nightingale Director

pjn7895

Statement of Compliance

The information in this report that relates to Mineral Exploration is based on information compiled by Augur staff and contractors and approved by Mr Michael Corey PGeo., who is a Member of the Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario (APGO) in Canada. Michael Corey is a full‐time employee of Augur Resources and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking 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'. Michael Corey has consented to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which they appear.

Mineralisation cut‐off used for the Wonogiri project is 0.2 g/t gold and/or 0.2% copper with a maximum contiguous dilution interval of 4.0 metres. Sample intervals are generally either 1.0 metre or 2.0 metres. Assaying has been completed by PT Intertek Utama Services, a subsidiary of Intertek Group Inc. Blanks and/or independent standards are used in each sample

batch at approximately each 10 sample interval.

4

Attachment 1

List of significant gold and copper intersections using a 0.2 g/t gold and 0.2% copper cut‐off respectively and a maximum internal dilution of 4.0 metres.

Wonogiri Drillhole Data & Compiled Significant Intersections WDD‐53 to WDD‐72

5

Attachment 2

JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 Report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sampling techniques

Drilling techniques

 Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.

 Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.

 Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.

 In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg

'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain

1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed

information.

 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open‐ hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of Diamond tails, face‐ sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).

 Diamond drill core was logged by geologists for major lithological units and alteration zones to determine sampling intervals. All sample intervals were marked by core blocks, entered into a ledger and assigned a unique sample number. After cutting and sampling detailed logging continued using standardised forms which were entered into the database and verified daily. Diamond drill core samples are collected from electric

saw cut half core at intervals generally either
1.0 metre or 2.0 metres.

 At the site office the core boxes were weighed and photographed (wet and dry), logged, and then marked‐up for half‐core cutting and sampling by trained technicians. All work was directly supervised by the Site Geologist.

 Samples were oven dried at 105°C, weighed then jaw crushed to 95% <2mm. A 1.5 kg subsample was riffle spit for pulverising to

95%<200#. Two splits were taken from this product, one for analysis the other for
QAQC. Samples were analysed for gold using
method FA51, a lead collection fire assay using a 50g charge with an AAS finish. Base metals contents were estimated by method IC01, which used an aqua regia digest with ICP‐OES finish.

 Diamond drill including PQ, HQ and NQ core collection utilising standard triple‐tube wire line equipment. Holes are surveyed upon completion using a downhole camera.

6

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Drill sample recovery

 Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.

 Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.

 Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.

 Core was cut in half using an electric powered, water cooled Diamond blade core cutter located at the site office. Core samples were cut carefully to minimise breakage and to prevent parts of the sample being washed away during cutting. Core intervals that were clay rich and broken or friable were not cut but representatively sampled by spatula and spoon.

 Drilling supervisors informed prior to start of hole where intersection expected.

 Half core was bagged according to the

sample specifications. PQ core was generally
sampled in 0.5 metre lengths whilst HQ and NQ core was sampled in 1 metre lengths where mineralised and 2 metre lengths elsewhere. Sampling intervals were constrained to major lithologic boundaries.

 There is no significant relationship between recovery and grade.

Logging  Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.

 Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.

 The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

 Diamond drill core was logged by geologists for lithological units and alteration zones and structural features to determine sampling intervals. All sample intervals were marked by core blocks, entered into a ledger and assigned a unique sample number. After cutting and sampling detailed logging continued using standardised forms which were entered into the database and verified daily. Core logging is both qualitative and quantitative. Core is logged descriptively

and codes are used to describe alteration
type/intensity, quartz type and intensity as well as various percentages of minerals. Structural data including veins, shears and fractures are recorded relative to the core axis.

 Core recovery and RQD are recorded in the Geotechnical log. The average core recovery from 72 drillholes is 96%. Recoveries of less than 90% are (depending on the cause of reduced recovery) redrilled to obtain better recovery if necessary. At the site office the core boxes were weighed and photographed (wet and dry), logged, and then marked‐up for half‐core cutting and sampling by trained technicians. All work was directly supervised by the Site Geologist.

7

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sub‐sampling techniques and sample preparation

Quality of assay data and laboratory tests

 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.

 If non‐core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.

 For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.

 Quality control procedures adopted for all sub‐ sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.

 Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second‐half sampling.

 Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.

 The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.

 For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.

 Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

 Selected core, based on lithology, alteration and visible mineralisation was cut in half using an electric powered, water cooled Diamond blade core cutter located at the site office. Half core samples are collected at 1m or in some cases 2 metre intervals. In some cases where 2 metre sample assays were considered significant (>0.5g/t) the same interval was resampled at 1 metre intervals using quarter core.

 Blanks and/or independent standards are used in each sample batch at approximately each 10 sample interval. Standards were purchased from Ore Research & Exploration Pty Ltd [Bayswater North, Australia]. At the Intertek laboratory samples were oven dried at 105°C, weighed then jaw crushed to 95%

<2mm. A 1.5 kg subsample was riffle spit for pulverising to 95%<200#. Two splits were taken from this product, one for analysis the other for QAQC. Samples were analysed for gold using method FA51, a lead collection
fire assay using a 50g charge with an AAS
finish. Base metals contents were estimated by method IC01, which used an aqua regia digest with ICP‐OES finish.

 Assaying is completed by PT Intertek Utama Services in Jakarta, a subsidiary of Intertek Group Inc. (accredited for chemical testing under ISO/ICE 17025:2005).

 A structured Quality‐Assurance‐Quality‐ Control program has been conducted during all drill phases. The program has consisted

of regular submission of blanks and prepared
standards and comparative sample runs with other laboratories. Standards were purchased from Ore Research & Exploration Pty Ltd [Bayswater North, Australia].

 Assays falling outside of acceptable ranges are re‐assayed. Intertek Laboratories also carry out routine internal quality control,

and review of this data suggests there are no issues with either precision or accuracy.

 Separate groups of mineralised sample pulps are sent on a routine basis to other accredited laboratories in Jakarta to test for laboratory scale systematic errors.

8

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Verification of sampling and assaying

Location of data points

Data spacing and distribution

Orientation of data in relation to geological structure

 The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.

 The use of twinned holes.

 Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.

 Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

 Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down‐hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.

 Specification of the grid system used.

 Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

 Data spacing for reporting of Exploration

Results.

 Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.

 Whether sample compositing has been applied.

 Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.

 If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

 In 2011 the company arranged for renowned consultant Mr Greg Corbett to review the geological/deposit model and also evaluate the assay database and QAQC protocols.

 As the drilling to date has been entirely by Diamond drill no twinned holes have been completed. It is expected that some number of twinned holes will be completed as part of the proposed feasibility study.

 All field and laboratory data is entered into an Excel database with QA/QC templates included.

 No adjustments to the assay data has occurred.

 Initially collars are located with hand held GPS devices. Drill collar elevations and hole locations are later recorded with differential GPS equipment by a licenced surveyor.

 The mapping grid is WGS 84, Zone 49 South.

Topographic control is by Lidar survey and differential GPS.

 Core samples are generally taken over 1 metre intervals from surface to the end of hole. Drill holes vary from 50 metres to 100 metres apart. Holes were drilled due East and due West across apparent preferred

orientations of mineralisation and controlling structural features.

 Holes were drilled to obtain representative mineralised intersections across interpreted structural controlling features. The structures are interpreted to be subvertical and trending generally northeast/northwest/north. As such drillholes were drilled either due East or due West with declinations of ‐40 to ‐65 degrees.

 No oriented drill holes have been completed so reported widths are downhole or apparent widths and not true widths.

 Based on current interpretation the reported widths are likely to be some degree wider than the true widths.

9

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Sample security		The measures taken to ensure sample security.		Sample batches were packed into sealed and annotated rice sacks and road transported
by the company to the Intertek laboratory in
Jakarta. Samples were subjected to full
security from drilling through processing till
delivery to the laboratory. Intertek standard
sample submission forms were cross‐
checked with Sample Receipt Confirmation
notes issued by the laboratory. Laboratory
results were emailed to the site office as well
as the corporate offices in Jakarta and
Sydney.
Audits or reviews		The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.		The sampling and assay database were audited and validated in 2012 during
preparation of the initial mineral resource
estimate.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status

Exploration done by other parties

 Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.

 The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.

 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

 The 3,928 hectare Wonogiri property tenure is under the Indonesian National Izin Usaha Pertambangan or Mining Business License (IUP) system. The Wonogiri IUP (545.21/054/2009) is held

100% by PT Alexis Perdana Mineral
('Alexis'). Augur's wholly owned
subsidiary, Wonogiri Pty Ltd, directly holds a 45% interest in Alexis.

 The IUP is currently in the Exploration Stage and must be converted to an Exploitation licence by January 2015.

 There are no forestry restrictions over the IUP nor any social or environmental issues known.

 The Wonogiri property was previously explored by PT Oxindo a wholly‐owned subsidiary of MMG Ltd during 2009‐2010. Oxindo completed surface mapping, sampling and a ground magnetic survey followed by drilling of 5 holes (1,996.3 metres) to test porphyry Cu‐Au targets. Although the drilling confirmed the presence of porphyry‐type mineralisation within the Randu Kuning prospect area the resource potential was deemed by MMG Ltd to be too small for their criteria.

10

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

 The Wonogiri property is host to porphyry‐ type copper‐gold mineralisation at the Randu Kuning deposit and also associated low sulphidation epithermal type, quartz vein hosted gold mineralisation in adjacent prospect areas. The property lies within the tectonically complex Sunda‐Banda Magmatic Arc which hosts the world‐class Batu Hijau and Tujuh Bukit porphyry copper‐gold deposits.

Drill hole

Information

Data aggregation methods

Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths

 A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:

o easting and northing of the drill hole collar

o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar

o dip and azimuth of the hole

o down hole length and interception depth

o hole length.

 If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

 In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut‐off grades are usually Material and should be stated.

 Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.

 The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

 These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.

 If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.

 If it is not known and only the down hole lengths

 See Attachment 1 in this announcement.

 Aggregate (compiled) significant intersections reported are based on assays utilising a cut‐off of 0.2 g/t gold and/or

0.2% copper with a maximum contiguous dilution interval of 4.0 metres. The intervals reported are downhole intervals and reported assays are averages for the interval and unless otherwise stated are not weighted averages. Use of weighted
averages were not deemed necessary given
that sampled lengths and core sizes were the same. Reported intervals of higher grades (≥1.0 g/t) within a wider lower grade interval are stated using the same parameters and are included in order to denote the tenor of interpreted primary, structurally controlled feeder zones.

 No oriented drill holes have been completed so reported widths are downhole or apparent widths and not true widths.

 Based on current interpretation the reported widths are likely to be some

to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').

11

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary

Diagrams		Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.		Pertinent maps and sections are included.
Balanced reporting		Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable,		Reporting is fully representative of the data.
representative reporting of both low and high
grades and/or widths should be practiced to
avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
Other substantive exploration data		Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk		All data is fully reported.
samples - size and method of treatment;
metallurgical test results; bulk density,
groundwater, geotechnical and rock
characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminating substances.
Further work		The nature and scale of planned further work (eg		The results reported are from a 22 hole,
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions	3,641 metre regional drill program.
	or large‐scale step‐out drilling). Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of		Future drill plans will depend on ongoing geological interpretation and the results of
possible extensions, including the main	current exploration.

geological interpretations and future drilling

areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

Section 3 does not apply as resource estimates are not being disclosed at this time, Section 4 does not apply as reserve estimates are not being disclosed at this time and Section 5 does not apply as this section relates to the reporting of diamonds and other gemstones.

12