rmx presentation 2015 annual general & special meeting

RMX: TSX | RBY: NYSE MKT

Michael A. Lalonde, President and CEO 2015 Annual General and Special Meeting

June 24, 2015

Canada’s Next Potential

High-Grade Gold Producer


Forward Looking Statements & Cautionary Notes

Cautionary Statement regarding Forward-Looking Statements and other Cautionary Notes

Forward-Looking Statements

This presentation contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” and “forward looking information” (collectively, “forward-looking statements”)

within the meaning of applicable Canadian and United States securities legislation. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to statements regarding the

start of projected initial production at the Phoenix Gold Project occurring in mid-2015, the anticipated timeline of the underground development of the Phoenix Gold

Project, the schedule of the mill commissioning process at the Phoenix Gold Project, the anticipated use of the proceeds of the loan facility and the anticipated

electricity cost savings the Company will realize in connection with the electricity cost savings program.

Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management as of the date such statements are made and represent management’s best

judgment based on facts and assumptions that management considers reasonable. The material assumptions upon which such forward-looking statements are based

include, among others, that: the demand for gold and base metal deposits will develop as anticipated; the price of gold will remain at levels that will render the

Phoenix Gold Project economic; operating and capital plans will not be disrupted by operational issues, power supply, labour disturbances, or adverse weather

conditions; Rubicon will meet its estimated timeline for the development of the Phoenix Gold Project; Rubicon will continue to have the ability to attract and retain

skilled staff; the mineral resource estimate as disclosed in the Preliminary Economic Assessment with an effective date of June 25, 2013 and with an issue date of

February 28, 2014 (the “PEA”) will be realized; and there are no material unanticipated variations in the cost of energy or supplies, or in the pre-production capital and

operating cost estimate as disclosed in the PEA.

Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of

Rubicon to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such factors include,

among others: possible variations in mineralization, grade or recovery rates; actual results of current exploration activities; actual results of reclamation activities;

conclusions of future economic evaluations; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; failure of equipment or processes to operate as anticipated;

accidents and other risks of the mining industry; delays and other risks related to construction activities and operations; timing and receipt of regulatory approvals of

operations; the ability of Rubicon and other relevant parties to satisfy regulatory requirements; the availability of financing for proposed transactions, programs and

working capital requirements on reasonable terms; the ability of third-party service providers to deliver services on reasonable terms and in a timely manner; market

conditions and general business, economic, competitive, political and social conditions.

The PEA is preliminary in nature as it includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied

to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves and there is no certainty that the PEA will be realized. Mineral resources that are not mineral

reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title,

taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. The quantity and grade of reported inferred resources referred to in the PEA are uncertain in nature and

there has been insufficient exploration to define these inferred resources as an indicated or measured mineral resource category.

It is important to note that the information provided in this presentation is preliminary in nature. There is no certainty that a potential mine will be realized. A mine

production decision that is not based on a feasibility study demonstrating economic and technical viability does not provide adequate disclosure of the increased

uncertainty and specific risks of failure associated with such a production decision.

Forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this presentation and Rubicon disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking

statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or results or otherwise, except as required by applicable securities laws. There can be no assurance

that forward-looking statements 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 statements. 2


Cautionary Note to U.S. Readers Regarding Estimates of Indicated and Inferred Resources

This presentation uses the terms “measured” and “indicated” mineral resources and “inferred” mineral resources. The Company advises U.S. investors that while these

terms are recognized and required by Canadian securities administrators, they are not recognized by the SEC. The estimation of “measured” and “inferred” mineral

resources involves greater uncertainty as to their existence and economic feasibility than the estimation of proven and probable reserves. The estimation of “inferred”

resources involves far greater uncertainty as to their existence and economic viability than the estimation of other categories of resources. It cannot be assumed that

all or any part of a “measured”, “inferred” or “indicated” mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category.

Under Canadian rules, estimates of “inferred mineral resources” may not form the basis of feasibility studies, pre-feasibility studies or other economic studies, except

in prescribed cases, such as in a preliminary economic assessment under certain circumstances. The SEC normally only permits issuers to report mineralization that

does not constitute “reserves” as in-place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures. Under U.S. standards, mineralization may not be classified as a

“reserve” unless the determination has been made that the mineralization could be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve

determination is made. U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of a “measured”, “indicated” or “inferred” mineral resource exists or is

economically or legally mineable. Information concerning descriptions of mineralization and resources contained herein may not be comparable to information made

public by U.S. companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements of the SEC.

Mineral Resources

Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by

environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. The quantity and grade of reported inferred resources in this

estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these inferred resources as an indicated or measured mineral resource and it is

uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an indicated or measured mineral resource category. The inclusion of inferred mineral resources are

considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. The mineral resources in

this press release were reported using CIM Standards.

Qualified Persons

The content of this corporate presentation has been read and approved by Michael Lalonde, P.Eng., President and CEO of Rubicon. He is a Qualified Persons as defined

by NI 43-101.

Forward Looking Statements & Cautionary Notes

3


The Rubicon Minerals Advantage

Low risk ‣ Significantly funded; substantial infrastructure built; fully permitted to 1,250 tpd;

‣ Safe jurisdiction.

High-grade gold project ‣ Positive and conservative PEA; 8.1 g/t Au to the mill;

‣ On schedule for projected initial production in mid-2015.

Experienced management team ‣ Proven production expertise in underground gold deposits;

‣ Over 100 years of operational experience.

4

Red Lake Ontario, Canada

Toronto


Cochenour (G)

Red Lake Gold Mines (G)

Phoenix Gold Project

(RMX)

F2 Structures

Red Lake, ON

Prolific Gold Mining District Red Lake, Ontario

N

Rubicon (RMX) claims – 100% Controlled

Goldcorp (G) claims

Ultramafic units

F2 folds

Gold projects in development

Existing gold mines

High-priority RMX exploration targets

Slate Bay

DMC

Adams Lake

East Bay

5


LOM projected gold production 2.19 million oz

Average annual projected gold production 165,300 oz

Diluted grade to the mill 8.1 g/t Au

Total dilution (internal and external) applied 44%

Cash operating cost US$599/oz (C$629/oz)

All-in sustaining cost2 US$870/oz (C$913/oz)

Average LOM daily throughput 1,900 tpd

Mining method 90% long-hole stoping

Production life 13.25 years

Gold recovery 92.5%

Shaft extension bottom 1,400-metre level

1 The PEA was prepared by SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. with metallurgical sections prepared by Soutex Inc., both of whom are independent of the Company as defined by NI 43-101, with

an effective date of June 24, 2013 and with an issue date of February 28, 2014. See FLS and Disclaimer section for important disclosure on the PEA. See also News Release dated June 25,

2013

2 All-in sustaining cash costs include operating costs, royalties, gold streaming, and sustaining capital and do not include any pre-production capital expenditures, allocation of estimated

corporate overhead costs or exploration costs.

Conservative, Positive PEA Highlights1

6

Conservative

compared to prior

mineral resource

estimates

Conservative

sustaining capex

estimate of

~US$185/oz

Manageable

throughput


LOM Projected Production & Cost Profile1

0

50

100

150

200

250

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 $-

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

Projected production Cash operating cost/Recovered ounce

Po

ten

tial

An

nu

al

Pro

du

cti

on

(000)

Cash

Op

era

ting

Co

st P

er O

un

ce

(US

$)

7 1Based on PEA estimate.


Lode Gold Deposit Case History: Campbell Mine (Red Lake, Ontario)

8

Rese

rves

(000 o

z)

Pro

ductio

n (0

00 o

z)

Campbell Mine:

Mineral Reserves and Gold Production

‣Mineral reserves: <1.5 million oz (first 35 years)

‣Total production: >11.0 million oz (60-year mine life)

Source: Goldcorp (2006) Note: This chart is intended to help explain the nature of historical mineral deposits in the Red Lake area. In no way is Rubicon suggesting or implying that it will achieve the same results in respect of its reserves and production.


With US$ currently trading at ~C$1.231…

More than 80% of Phoenix Project projected operating cost is denominated in

C$

Despite the ~US$200/oz decline in the gold price since the PEA, the C$ gold

price is up 7% since PEA

US$50 million debt

received from CPPIB

The Canadian Dollar Advantage

9

1CAD/USD exchange rate is based as of June 23, 2015, at C$1.2363/US$1; source: Kitco


SAG and ball mill Conveyor

CIL tanks Control room

Phoenix Gold Project Mill construction completed and commissioning

10


10-ton skip Longhole drilling at 305-metre level

Phoenix Gold Project Underground ready for stoping

11


Phoenix Gold Project Achievements

12

On schedule for projected initial production in mid-2015; Mill

construction complete; Mill commissioning continues with the

processing of low-grade mineralized material (to be completed in

early July).

Completed initial 8,023 metres of planned underground development

on June 5, 2015. The Company plans to begin stoping on the 244-

and 305-metre levels, following the completion of the commissioning phase.

Secured US$50 million loan facility with Canada Pension Plan

Investment Board; proceeds provide adequate working capital and

flexibility during the ramp-up period.

Enrolled in the electricity cost savings program where we anticipate

cost savings of C$4 million per full year of operations.


Phoenix Gold Project Timeline

13

• Mill commissioning

commenced

• C$30 million flow-through

financing

(April 2015)

2015

Ramp-up period

Stockpiling

of mill feed

(December 2014)

First Gold Pour

June 2015

U/G development

to projected initial

production

completed

(June 5, 2015)

Completed 38,000 m

infill drilling program

(January 2015)

• US$50 million

loan facility secured

• Processing low-grade

mineralized material

• Enrolled in IEI Program

(May 2015)


P/NAV Multiple: RMX vs. Canadian Gold Producers Chasing the Canadian producer multiple

14

RMX trades at an average discount of 34% from the mean P/NAV

multiple of Canadian producers

P/NAV Multiple – RMX vs. Canadian Gold Producers

Source: BMO Capital Markets, TD Securities, National Bank Financial, Company estimates (as of June 12, 2015)

BMO rating on RMX: Outperform, $2.00 targetNBF Rating on RMX: Outperform, $1.90 target TD rating on RMX: Speculative Buy, $2.25 target

0.9x

0.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.0

1.3

RMX KGI RIC WDO AUQ DGC LSG

NBF

Mean: 0.9x

0.6x

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

RMX KGI DGC AUQ LSG

BMO

Mean: 1.8x

0.6x

0.0

0.6

1.2

1.8

RMX RIC DGC LSG AUQ

TD

Mean: 1.0x


What It’s All About!!!

15


Officers & Directors

Michael A. Lalonde, P.Eng.

President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director

David R. Beatty, C.M., O.B.E.

Chairman

Nick Nikolakakis, MBA

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Julian Kemp, BBA, CA, CPA, C.Dir.

Director

Bill Shand, P.Eng.

Vice President, Operations

Peter Rowlandson, P.Eng.

Director

Howard Bird, B.Sc., P.Geo.

Vice President, Exploration

Bruce A. Thomas, LL.B.

Director

Glenn Kumoi, LL.B.

Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary

Michael D. Winship, P.Eng.

Director

Allan Candelario, CFA

Vice President, Investor Relations

Allan Candelario, CFA

Vice President, Investor Relations

Phone: 1.866.365.4706

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.rubiconminerals.com

Head Office

Suite 400 – 44 Victoria St.

Toronto, ON Canada M5C 1Y2

Toll Free: 1.866.365.4706

16

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.rubiconminerals.com/

rmx presentation 2015 annual general & special meeting

Investor Relations

phoenix gold project

price of gold

gold producer

project parameters

anticipated timeline

future results

ability of rubicon

achievements of rubicon