Arizona Metals Corp · Arizona Metals Corp. History of the Kay Mine 6 • Prior to 1900: Kay Mine was discovered and mined on a small scale from the inclined No. 1 shaft, produced

Arizona Metals Corp.

Corporate Presentation March 2019

*

*Name change from Croesus Gold Corp subject to shareholder approval at upcoming Special Meeting

January 2020


2

Statements contained in this presentation that are not historical facts are “forward-looking information” or “forward-looking statements” (collectively, “Forward-Looking Information”) within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward Looking Information includes, but is not limited to, disclosure regarding possible events, conditions or financial performance that is based on assumptions about future economic conditions and courses of action; the timing and costs of future exploration and testing activities on the Company’s properties; success of exploration activities; time lines for technical reports; planned exploration and development of properties and the results thereof; and planned expenditures and budgets and the execution thereof. Statements concerning historical mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. In certain cases, Forward-Looking Information can be identified by the use of words and phrases such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, budget”, “scheduled”, “suggest”, “optimize”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, “potential” or “does not anticipate”, believes”, “anomalous” 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”. In making the forward-looking statements in this presentation, the Company has applied several material assumptions, including, but not limited to, that the current testing and other objectives concerning the Kay Mine Project and Sugarloaf Peak project can be achieved and that its other corporate activities will proceed as expected; that the current price and demand for

gold will be sustained or will improve; that general business and economic conditions will not change in a materially adverse manner and that all necessary governmental approvals for the planned exploration on the Kay Mine Project and Sugarloaf Peak projects will be obtained in a timely manner and on acceptable terms; the continuity of the price of gold and other metals, that the Company’s existing patented and unpatented land has not been altered by any designation under U.S. Federal statute or other laws and economic and political conditions and operations.

Forward-Looking Information involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the Forward-Looking Information. Such risks and other factors include, among others, obtaining financing on commercially reasonable terms, operations and contractual obligations; changes in exploration programs based upon results of exploration; future prices of metals; availability of third party contractors; availability of equipment; failure of equipment to operate as anticipated; accidents, effects of weather and other natural phenomena and other risks associated with the mineral exploration industry; environmental risks, including environmental matters under U.S. federal and Arizona rules and regulations; impact of environmental remediation requirements and the terms of existing and potential consent decrees on the Company’s planned exploration on the Kay Mine Project and Sugarloaf Peak project; certainty of mineral title; community relations; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing; fluctuations in mineral prices; the Company’s dependence on

two mineral projects; the nature of mineral exploration and mining and the uncertain commercial viability of certain mineral deposits; the Company’s lack of operating revenues; governmental regulations and the ability to obtain necessary licenses and permits; risks related to mineral properties being subject to prior unregistered agreements, transfers or claims and other defects in title; impacts to patented and unpatented land by designation under U.S. Federal Statute or other laws, currency fluctuations; changes in environmental laws and regulations and changes in the application of standards pursuant to existing laws and regulations which may increase costs of doing business and restrict operations; risks related to dependence on key personnel; and estimates used in financial statements proving to be incorrect. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could affect the Company and may cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in Forward-Looking Information, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that Forward-Looking Information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on Forward-Looking Information. Except as required by law, the Company does not assume any obligation to release publicly any revisions to Forward-Looking Information contained in this presentation to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

Forward-Looking Statement


Sugarloaf Peak Project, La Paz County Arizona• 100%-owned, comprising 222 BLM claims covering 4,410 acres

• Historic estimate of 1.5Moz gold at 0.5g/t Au

• Heap-leach, open-pit target open for expansion in all directions

• Starts at surface, oxidized, flat-lying, and tabular

Kay Mine Project, Yavapai County, Arizona• 100%-owned, comprising 70 patented acres and 1,260 acres of BLM claims

• High grade VMS deposit with underground exploration from 1951 to 1979

• Historic estimate of 6Mt at 5.8% CuEq (2.2% Cu, 3.03% Zn, 2.81 g/t Au, 55 g/t Ag)

• Open at depth and only 25% of known strike tested

• 6,000m drill program commenced January 2020; first assay results expected 2Q’20

Investment Highlights

3

* The historical estimates for the Kay Mine and Sugarloaf Peak Projects predate and are unclassified and not compliant with NI 43-101 guidelines. Significant data compilation, re-drilling, re-sampling and data verification may be required by a Qualified Person before the historic resource can be verified and upgraded to be compliant with current NI 43-101 standards. The Company’s QP has not yet undertaken sufficient work to classify the historic estimate as a current resource and the Company is not treating the historic estimate as a current resource


Paul Reid MBA, Executive Chairman• 15 years of experience in financing mineral exploration, development

and production assets • Founder and former Chairman of Telegraph Gold (listed as Castle

Mountain Mining, later acquired by Equinox Gold) • An Investment Banking professional with extensive experience in

raising capital, going-public transactions and advisory services

Colin Sutherland, Director• CPA with 20 years operational and financial experience• Most recently served as President of McEwen Mining (NYSE:MUX)

(TSX:MUX)• Served as CEO and Managing Director of Archipelago Resources Plc,

where he grew production to 200,000 ounces per year• Held senior financial and executive roles with Timmins Gold, Capital

Gold, Nayarit Gold, and Aurico Gold

Rick Vernon, Director• 30 years experience as mining finance professional• Previously Managing Director, Head of Investment Banking at PI

Financial Corp.• Previously Managing Director, Head of Investment Banking at Stonecap

Securities Inc.• BSc in Geological Sciences from Queen’s University• MBA from University of Southern California

David Smith CPG, Vice President of Exploration

• 30 years of global precious metals exploration experience, including co-discovery of ~1M oz Au eq Solidaridad/La Sabila deposit, Mexico

• Core expertise is managing mineral projects from acquisition to exploration, resource modeling, and project development

• MSc from University of Oregon• MBA from Pinchot University/Presidio Graduate School

Marc Pais, President and CEO, Director• B.Sc. Geological Engineering (Mineral Exploration) from Queen’s

University• Founder and former President of Telegraph Gold (listed as Castle

Mountain Mining, later acquired by Equinox Gold)• Seven years experience as a Mining Analyst, with a focus on precious

metals development companies

Sung Min (Eric) Myung, Chief Financial Officer• Senior Financial Analyst at Marrelli Support Services Inc.• Previously worked at public accounting firms for 7 years• Canadian Professional Accountant designation• Master of Accounting degree from University of Waterloo

Conor Dooley, Corporate Secretary, Director• Partner at WeirFoulds LLC in Toronto• Advises clients in securities regulatory matters and capital markets

transactions• LLB from Dalhousie University

Dr. Mark Hannington, Technical Advisor• 35 years of experience as a research geologist, specializing on

volcanogenic massive sulfide deposits and the metallogeny of modern and ancient volcanic belts

• Currently a Professor of Economic Geology at the University of Ottawa• Previously worked as a senior scientist in mineral resources at the

Geological Survey of Canada for 15 years• BSc in Geology from Queen’s University• MSc and PhD from the University of Toronto

Leadership Team

4


Shares Outstanding (basic) 49.5M

Options 7.1M

Warrants 6.8M

Shares Outstanding (FD) 63.4M

Cash at September 30, 2019 $2.5M

Ownership by Management and Insiders 15.1M (31%)

Capital Structure

5

OwnershipManagement and Insiders,

30.5%

Retail and Institutional

Investors, 63.6%

Riverside Resources, 5.9%


History of the Kay Mine

6

• Prior to 1900: Kay Mine was discovered and mined on a small scale from the inclined No. 1 shaft, produced 635 tonnes • 1918 to 1929: Kay Copper Company – deepened the No. 1 Shaft to 457 m (1,500 ft), sunk the No. 4 shaft to 366 m (1,200 ft),

installed the No. 3 Shaft, and developed several thousand feet of underground workings on 11 levels, discovering the ore bodies above the 600 Level but produced no ore. The company drilled at least 89 underground drill holes. The Kay Copper Company failed in the late 1920s and the project was dormant until 1949, apparently from a combination of low metals prices and litigation

• 1949 to 1956: Various Mid-Century Operators – in 1949 Black Canyon Copper Corporation, opened the underground workings to the 500 Level and shipped about 907 tonnes (1,000 short tons) of ore. In 1949, Black Canyon Copper sub-leased the project to Shattuck-Denn Mining Company and New Jersey Zinc Company until 1952. These companies dewatered and rehabilitated the No. 4 Shaft at least to the 1000 Level, and performed surface and underground exploration, including resampling and underground diamond drilling of at least 14 holes. They shipped 1,425 tonnes of ore(1,571 short tons). In 1955-1956, the project was leased to Republic Metals Company, which shipped 414 tonnes (456 short tons) of ore from above the 350 Level. A cave-in destroyed pumping operations, and the mine was allowed to flood

• 1972 to 1984: Exxon Minerals – the project was acquired by Exxon Minerals Company in 1972, which completed geologic mapping; “mine mapping”; relogging drill core and cuttings; petrographic studies; assaying 610 m (2,000 ft) of unassayed drill core; stream sediment and soil geochemistry surveys; reviewing historical assay data and incorporating into mine maps and cross sections; and geophysical surveys. Exxon drilled 23 core/rotary exploration holes totaling 8,094 m (26,554 ft), 14 of which were in the immediate vicinity of the Kay Mine and which total 6,807 m (22,333 ft)

• 1990 to 2015: Post-Exxon Multiple Owners – the five patented claims changed hands a number of times between 1990 and 2015, without exploration work. In 1990 Exxon sold the five patented claims to Rayrock Mines, which in turn sold them to American Copper and Nickel Company in 1995. Ownership changed a number of times until 2015, but no exploration work completed

• 2017 to 2018: Silver Spruce Resources – in March, 2017, Silver Spruce Resources Inc. acquired five patented mining claims and then staked 14 unpatented Kay Mine mining claims in April, 2017. Silver Spruce took 39 samples on the project but did no other exploration work. In Sept 2018, Arizona Metals Corp acquires Kay Mine claims from Silver Spruce Resources.

• 2018 to present: Arizona Metals Corp completed helicopter VTEM survey ( March 2019) and staked 50 additional unpatented mining claims. Drill roads and pads repaired (Dec 2019). Phase 1 6,000m core drill program commenced Jan 2020.


• Kay Mine – located 45 miles north of Phoenix, Arizona

• High-grade VMS deposit with historic resource estimate of 742Mlb copper at 5.8% CuEq

• Sugarloaf Peak – located 130 miles west of Phoenix, Arizona

• Heap-leach, open-pit target

Project Locations

7


Source: Fellows, 1982 (Exxon Minerals) and Dausinger 1983 (Westworld Resources)


Kay Mine Project Overview – within 2 hours drive of two smelter complexes

8


9

Kay Mine Project Overview – surrounded by high-grade historic past producing VMS mines

United Verde: Produced 30Mt at 4.8% copper produced by Phelps Dodge

Extension: Blind discovery underground that produced 3.5 Mt at 10.2% Cu, 1.3 g/t Au, 58 g/t Ag

1884 - 1975

Iron King Mine: Produced 5.1Mt at 4.2g/t Au, 127 g/t Ag, 7.3% Zn, 2.5% Pb, and 0.2% Cu

1903 - 1969

Blue Bell Mine: Produced 1.1Mt at 3% Cu, 2g/t Au, and 51g/t Ag

1903 - 1959

Bruce Mine: Produced 822kt at 3.3% Cu, 9.0% Zn

1968-1977

Old Dick Mine: Produced 1.35Mt at 3.5% Cu, 12% Zn, 0.7g/t Au and 11g/t Ag

1947 - 1966

Kay Mine(Arizona Metals Corp.)


• Located 45 miles north of Phoenix in the Yavapai County, Arizona

• Kay deposit host stratigraphy has been traced over 5,600 feet at surface with only 25% (1,400 feet of strike) drill tested

• Mineralization consists of two steeply dipping massive sulfide bodies

• In 1982, it was estimated the Kay Mine hosted 6Mt at 5.8% CuEq (2% CuEq cut-off grade)

Kay Mine Project Overview

!.

!.

!.!.!.

!.!.!.!.

!.

!. !.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

¸

¸

¸

¸Shaft No 2

Shaft No 4

Shaft No 3

Shaft No 1

390500

390500

391000

391000

391500

391500

392000

392000

392500

392500

393000

393000

393500

393500

394000

394000

394500

394500

3766

500

3766

500

3767

000

3767

000

3767

500

3767

500

3768

000

3768

000

3768

500

3768

500

3769

000

3769

000

3769

500

3769

500

3770

000

3770

000

3770

500

3770

500

3771

000

3771

000

0 500 1,000250Meters

LegendRecently Staked BLM Claims

Kay Mine Patented Claim Boundary

KayMine Unpatented Claim Boundary

¸ Mine Shaft

!. Drill Collars

Datum: WGS 84 UTM Zone 12N

Ü

Mineralized Orebodies Projected to Surface

200 - 350 Levels

500 - 800 Levels

1000 - 1200 Levels

1350 - 1500 Levels

2100 Level

10

Source: Fellows, 1982 (Exxon Minerals)



Kay Mine Historic Resource Estimate

Source: Fellows, 1982

Kay MineTonnes (Mt) 5.8

Cu Grade (%) 2.20%

Zn grade (%) 3.03%

Silver Grade (g/t) 55

Gold grade (g/t) 2.81

Copper, 39%

Gold, 31%

Zinc, 22%

Silver, 7%

Kay Deposit Value by Metal

11* The historical estimates for the Kay Mine and Sugarloaf Peak Projects predate and are unclassified and not compliant with NI 43-101 guidelines. Significant data compilation, re-drilling, re-sampling and data verification may be required by a Qualified Person before the historic resource can be verified and upgraded to be compliant with current NI 43-101 standards. The Company’s QP has not yet undertaken sufficient work to classify the historic estimate as a current resource and the Company is not treating the historic estimate as a current resource


Historic Grade Estimates

12


Source: Estimates by Arizona Metals Corp. Data from Exxon Minerals 1972-1982


Historic Kay Mine Project Overview

13

Source: Estimates by Arizona Metals Corp. Data from Exxon Minerals 1972-1982* The historical estimates for the Kay Mine and Sugarloaf Peak Projects predate and are unclassified and not compliant with NI 43-101 guidelines. Significant data compilation, re-drilling, re-sampling and data verification may be required by a Qualified Person before the historic resource can be verified and upgraded to be compliant with current NI 43-101 standards. The Company’s QP has not yet undertaken sufficient work to classify the historic estimate as a current resource and the Company is not treating the historic estimate as a current resource


A B

C D

E F

GH

IJ

K L

M N

OP

QR

S T

Proposed Kay Mine Project Phase 1 Drill Program of 6,000 m in 16 holes

Looking NE

14

Shaft No 1

580

630

590

600

610

620

640

650

660

67068

0 580

620

590

580

640 640

580

590

580

580

590

580

660

580

580

590

580

620

630

590

580

580

580

600

590

590

580

580

580

590

650

580

580

580

580

580

580

580

590

580

630

590

590590

580

580

580

580

660

580

590

590

580

650 58

0

580

640

580

650

640

580

650

630

580

640

580

580

580

590

590

580

580

590

580

580

650

392400

392400

392500

392500

392600

392600

392700

392700

392800

392800

392900

392900

393000

393000

393100

393100

3769

100

3769

100

3769

200

3769

200

3769

300

3769

300

3769

400

3769

400

3769

500

3769

500

0 100 20050Meters

Pad 1

LegendProposed Drilling

Proposed Drill Pads

Kay Mine Property Boundary

!. Historic Drill Collars

T8NR2E

¯

Datum: WGS 84 UTM Zone 12N

Mineralized Orebodies Projected to Surface

200 - 350 Levels

500 - 800 Levels

1000 - 1200 Levels

1350 - 1500 Levels

2100 Level

Pad 2

Pad 3

6,000m Drill Program Commenced January 2020; First Assay Results Expected 2Q’20


15

Phase 1 Kay Mine Drilling in Progress

Boart Longyear engaged to complete 6,000m HQ and NQ core drill program


March 2019 helicopter VTEM survey defined a number of targets west of Kay Mine

¸

¸

¸

¸

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

89 7 6 5 3 2 14

11 47

34

21

32

23

14 1510 1813

28

12

27

363531

192024

33

1716

29 49

482526

30

22

46

4043 38 37 5045 44 42 41 39

K-9K-8K-7

K-6

K-5K-4K-3

K-2

K-1

K-17

KA-7

KA-5KA-2

KA-9

KV-3

KV-2

KV-1

K-16K-14

K-13

K-12

K-10

K-10A

KA-6_E

Shaft No 2

Shaft No 4

Shaft No 3

Shaft No 1

390500

390500

391000

391000

391500

391500

392000

392000

392500

392500

393000

393000

393500

393500

3768500

3768500

3769000

3769000

3769500

3769500

3770000

3770000

3770500

3770500

Old Workings (Gossan Zone)

0 500 1,000250Meters

¯

16

Source: Arizona Metals Corp, March 2019


Maxwell Plate Modelling of VTEM Identified 4 Untested Conductors

17


18

• 3 drill holes proposed to test the Central Conductor (MX2) and 6 for the Western Conductor (MX1)


Kay Mine Depth Potential Compared to VMS Deposits in Production

19

• Kay Mine is higher grade and only a fraction of the depth compared to operating copper mines– Lalor Lake (Hudbay Minerals), LaRonde (Agnico Eagle) and Kidd Creek (Glencore)



Source: Company reports 20


3.01.9 2.2

7.0

9.7 10.2

13.1

19.6

Average: 9.2 cents/lb 9.2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Kay Mine Constantine Kutcho Aquila Sun Metals Atico Adventus Sandfire

EV/R

esou

rce

CuEq

(cen

ts/l

b)Kay Mine EV/Resource (cents/lb) Compared to Cu-Au

VMS PeersCuEq/lb Avg CuEq


Source: Company reports 21


Adventus

Sun Metals

Atico (production)

Aquila Kutcho

Constantine

Arizona Metals Corp

Lalor Lake (production)

Kidd Creek (production)

Sandfire NALa Ronde (production)

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

0 5 10 15 20 25

Copp

er G

rade

(% C

uEq)

Total Deposit Tonnage (Mt)

VMS Deposits - Grade vs Tonnage


High Grade Copper-Gold VMS deposits are scarce and trade at a premium valuation

Company Arizona Metals Corp

Symbol TSXV:AMC

Share Price $0.50Market Capitalization (M) $25Cash (M) $2.5Earn-In Payments O/S (M) $0Enterprise Value (M) $23Project Name Kay MineLocation ArizonaOwnership 100%Royalties None

Total Historic Drilling (Kay Mine) 14,000m combined surface and U/G

Cut-off Grade (CuEq) 2.0%Total Attributable Resource* 5.8Mt at 5.8% CuEqContained CuEq (Mlbs) 742EV/lb CuEq $0.03

22



!.

!.

!.

!.!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!!(!

!(!!(!

!(!!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!!(!

!(!

!(!!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!(!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

GOODMAN FAULT ?

GOODMA N FAULT ?

SGL-11-04

Target C-5

SLP-09-005

SLP-09-004

SLP-09-003SLP-09-002

SLP-09-001

ASP-02ASP-03

SWR-16

CS-11A

ASP-04

ASP-01

CS-4 CS-5

CS-6

CS-1

CS-8

CS-9

WW-9

WW-8

WW-7

WW-6

WW-5

WW-4

WW-3

WW-2

WW-1

CS-7

CS-3

CS-11

WW-10

SWR-9SWR-8

SWR-7

SWR-6

SWR-5

SWR-4

SWR-3SWR-2

SWR-1

CS-12

CS-10

SWR-13 SWR-12

SWR-11 SWR-10

SGR-12-19

SGR-12-18

SGR-12-17

SGR-12-16

SGR-12-15

SGR-12-14

SGR-12-13

SGR-12-12SGR-12-11

SGR-12-09

SGR-12-08

SGR-12-07

SGR-12-10

Target C-2

Target C-4

Target C-3

Target C-1SGL-11-06

SGL-11-05SGL-11-04

SGL-11-03SGL-11-02

SGL-11-01

746000 747000 748000 749000

3724

000

3725

000

3726

000 ±

Riverside Claims

Third Party Placer Claims

Third Party Lode Claims

Cable

Pipeline

Roads

0 250 500

m

Datum: NAD83, UTM Zone 11N

Alteration

Silicic

Argillic and sericitic

Propylitic

Central Zone Exploration Targets

Legend

Au contours

> 500 ppb Au

> 200 ppb Au

Central Zone exploration targets

DrillholesGrade*Thickness (ppm*m)

! 0 - 5

! 6 - 15

! 16 - 30

! 31 - 45

! 46 - 69

• Coincident magnetic low and IP chargeability

anomalies extend 2 km to

the NW of historic resource

(Target C-5) and 1.5km to

the SE• Previous holes include:

• 66m of 0.54 g/t

• 88m of 0.78 g/t

• 125m of 0.4 g/t (EOH)

• 100m of 0.42 g/t Au

Sugarloaf Peak Deposit Provides Additional Optionality to Shareholders –Historic Resource Estimate of 1.5Moz gold at 0.5g/t

23


Source: Dausinger, 1983 (Westworld Resources), and Choice Gold 2011-2012

1.5Moz historic resource


Sugarloaf – Long Sections

24



Sugarloaf – Deposit Open Laterally and at Depth

25



3725030N SECTION

SCALE

-50 0 50 100 150 200

(m)

*unknown

W

S

E

NAZIMUTH = 112°

TOLERANCE +/- 250 m

SECTION TOP, BOT 778.1 m -693.9 m

EXTENTS 2350 m 1472 m

REF. PT. E, N 748203 m 3725030 m

SECTION SPECS:

HOLES PLOTTED

TOTAL 32

CS-12 CS-7 SGL-11-02 SGL-11-06SGR-12-09 SGR-12-12 SLP-09-001 SLP-09-002SLP-09-003 SLP-09-004 SLP-09-005 SWR-1

SWR-10 SWR-11 SWR-12 SWR-13SWR-14 SWR-18 SWR-2 SWR-3SWR-4 SWR-5 SWR-6 SWR-7SWR-8 SWR-9 WW-10 WW-5WW-6 WW-7 WW-8 WW-9

Au__ppb RBAR GRAPHS L/R COL

3D_Sugarloaf_DEM.dem

TOPOGRAPHY

7475

00 E

7480

00 E

7485

00 E

7490

00 E

3725000 N

3725000 N

3725500 N

CS-12

SGL-11-02

SGR-12-12

SLP-09-001

SLP-09-002 SLP-09-003

SLP-09-004

SWR-10SW

R-11

SWR-12

SWR-13

SWR-18

SWR-3

SWR-6

SWR-7

SWR

-8

SWR-9

WW-5

WW-7

WW-8

26

Sugarloaf – Untested IP Anomalies at Depth show Potential for Higher Grade Feeder Zones


Permitting

• Permitting underway –drill permit for 10,000m program expected Q1’20

• Located 15 miles from past-producing Copperstone Mine

• Both Copperstone and Sugarloaf are on BLM claims in La Paz County

• Copperstone open pit gold mine operated from 1987-1993 (Produced over 500koz)

Water

• Groundwater most likely source for mining operations (similar toCopperstone)

• Drill holes on and near the project (2.6 km) encountered groundwater

• Possible other sources include Bouse Canal (20km) and Colorado River (15km)

Infrastructure

• Adjacent to Interstate Highway 10

• Easy access to roads, rail, natural gas, and electricity

• 8 km west of the town of Quartzsite

27

Mining Friendly Jurisdiction


• Two 100% owned projects in mining-friendly Arizona

• Excellent infrastructure at both projects-road, power and water access• Kay Mine is a high-grade VMS target with historic estimate of 6Mt at

5.8% CuEq*• Sugarloaf is a near-surface, open-pit target with a 1.5Moz gold historic

resource estimate*

• Kay Mine valuation of $0.03/lb CuEq compared to high-grade VMS peers at an average of $0.09/lb

• Phase 1 core drill program of 6,000m at Kay Mine commenced Jan 2020• First assay results from Kay Mine drilling expected 2Q’20

Summary

28



Marc Pais President & CEO

416.565.7689

[email protected]

Paul Reid Chairman

416.845.9311

[email protected]

Contact

29

Websitehttp://www.arizonametalscorp.com/

Twitterhttps://twitter.com/ArizonaCorp

http://arizonametalscorp.com

http://arizonametalscorp.com

http://www.arizonametalscorp.com/

https://twitter.com/ArizonaCorp

Documents

Arizona Metals Corp · Arizona Metals Corp. History of the Kay Mine 6 • Prior to 1900: Kay Mine was discovered and mined on a small scale from the inclined No. 1 shaft, produced