May 2017

Van Dyke Copper ProjectArizona, USA

May 2017

Van Dyke Project (In-Situ Leach)

• Pre-tax NPV @ 8% & 5% ranged

from C$295 to C$390 million (i.e.

C$0.69 to C$0.92/share)

• IRR of 35.5% pre-tax

• 11 year LOM

• 60 Mlb Cu production Y1-Y6

• Direct Cash Cost of US$0.60/lb

and AISC of US$1.44/lb

• Preliminary Feasibility Study

recommended

• Permitting Process UnderwayThe above information was derived from the preliminary economic

assessment (‘PEA’). The PEA is preliminary in nature, 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. The basis for the

PEA, qualifications and assumptions made by the qualified persons

(‘QP’) are based on the “Preliminary Economic Assessment

Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project”, dated Dec. 18,

2015, J. Gray, P.Eng., et al as QPs. The PEA is the first current

engineering technical study undertaken on the Van Dyke copper

project.

2

Conversion of NPV to $C based on FOREX of 1.3957 as of December 18, 2015.

IRR = Internal Rate of Return; LOM = Life of Mine; AISC = All In Sustaining Cost; NPV = Net Present Value

3

PEA Highlights

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al

as Qualified Persons;.

IRR = Internal Rate of Return; LOM = Life of Mine; AISC = All In Sustaining Cost; NPV = Net Present Value

• The NI 43-101 Technical Report confirmed:

Positive IRR of 35.5% pre-tax and 27.9% post tax

11 year LOM

60 million lbs annualized copper production Y1-Y6

Direct Cash Cost of $US0.60/lb and AISC of $US1.44/lb

Project economics most sensitive to copper price and

recovery

Significant upside potential

• Before Tax NPV @ 8% & 5% discount rates ranged from

$US213.1 to $US282.9 million (i.e. $US0.52 to $US0.69/share)

4

NPV Project Sensitivity

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al as

Qualified Persons;.

IRR Project Sensitivity

5

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al

as Qualified Persons;.

Economic Enhancements

6

• Drilling to upgrade Inferred Mineral Resource and

expand size of the deposit

• ISL pilot test program to investigate:

metal recoveries

hydraulic conductivity

well field design and

extent of rock stimulation required, if any

• Opportunities to lower capital, sustaining and

operating costs

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et all

as Qualified Persons.

Copper Oxide Mineralization

7

Deposit Model

8

Resource Grade Blocks

9

3D Model Historical Grades

10

800m

1,000m

Access and Underground Well Field

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al

as Qualified Persons.

11

Soluble Copper After 120 day Leach Test

12

Based on Preliminary In-Situ Leach Study Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated November 2014 prepared by SGS E&S Engineering Solutions Inc ;.

Van Dyke – Proposed Production Plan

13

Proposed SX-EW Copper Recovery

14

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al

as Qualified Persons.

Proposed Infrastructure

15

PEA Economic Summary

16

Van Dyke - Economic Summary Unit Base Case

Life of Mine (LOM) years 11

Copper Cathode Sold Million lbs 456.9

Copper Price $US/lb 3.00

Gross Revenue $ 1,370,000,000

Royalties $ 31,500,000

Operating Costs (includes LOM sustaining costs) $ 619,800,000

LOM Direct Operating Cost ($/pound recovered copper) $/lb copper 0.60

Initial Capital Costs (includes 30% Contingency) $ 204,400,000

NPV & IRR (Base Case)

Discount Rate % 8%

Pre-Tax Net Free Cash Flow $ 453,100,000

Pre-Tax NPV $ 213,100,000

Pre-Tax IRR % 35.5

Payback Years 2.3

Post-Tax Net Free Cash Flow $ 342,200,000

Post-Tax NPV $ 149,500,000

Post-Tax IRR % 27.90%

Payback years 2.9

Estimated Capital Costs

17

Code Description Cost $(000's)

A General Site $ 10,000

B ISL Well Field $ 3,200

C Underground Mining $ 32,300

D Processing $ 49,100

E Buildings and Facilities $ 9,800

PP Initial Operating Costs* $ 10,200

Total Direct Costs $ 114,600

X Indirect Costs $ 36,900

Y Owner's Costs $ 10,400

Total Indirect Costs $ 47,300

Total Direct and Indirect Costs $ 161,900

Z Contingency $ 42,500

Total Capital Cost $ 204,400

Estimated Operating Costs

Operating CostsLOM Cost

($000's)LOM Unit Cost

ISL Well Field Acid Costs $25,000 $0.06

ISL Well Field Monitoring Costs $2,000 $0.01

ISL Well Field Electrical (Pumping) Costs $19,500 $0.04

ISL Well Field Maintenance Costs $19,200 $0.04

SX-EWG Processing Costs $123,400 $0.27

G&A, Offsite Costs $77,700 $0.17

Water Treatment Costs $6,600 $0.01

Total Operating Costs $273,400 $0.60

18

Estimated Unit Costs

19

Cash Cost Category Unit Cost ($US/lb)

Direct Cash Cost 0.60

Royalties and Severance Tax 0.08

Initial Sustaining Costs 0.15

Life of Mine Sustaining Costs 0.61

All In Sustaining Cost (AISC) 1.44

Proposed Development Plan

20

Estimate Cost Pre-Feasibility Study

21

Required Component for PFS Estimated Cost ($000)Drilling 4,675

Resource Model 300

Pilot Test 8,496

Pilot Permitting 1,000

Metallurgical Testing 500

Geotechnical Testing 200

Water Management 200

Pre-Feasibility Engineering Report 1,200

Total $US16,571

Arizona ISL Peer Comparables

ISL Advantages

Lower Environmental Impact Less surface disturbance Fewer permits required

22

(1) News Release Taseko Mines Limited, January 16, 2017

(2) Feasibility Study dated January 16, 2017, R. Zimmerman, P.G., et al as Qualified Persons

(3) Preliminary Economic Assessment dated December 18, 2015, prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray, P.Eng., et al as Qualified Persons

*Pre-Tax NPV discount rate for the Florence and Gunnison projects is 7.5%, 8.0% for Van Dyke.

IN-SITU RECOVERY COMPARABLES

DEPOSIT

TOTAL

COPPER

TOTAL

COPPERRECOVERY

ANNUAL

PRODUCTIONMINE LIFE

INITIAL

CAPITALPAYBACK

PRE-TAX

NPV*

TOTAL COST

COPPER

(BILLION LBS) GRADE (%) ESTIMATED (%) (MILLION LBS) YEARS ($US MILLION) YEARS ($US MILLION) $US/LB

FLORENCE (1) 2.84 0.33 71 81 21 208.0 2.4 727.0 1.10

GUNNISON (2) 6.30 0.29 48 125 20 311.1 6.5 1,173.0 0.99

VAN DYKE (3) 1.33 0.33 68 60 11 204.4 2.3 213 0.71

ZoneCut-off -

TCu(%)tonnes TCu (%) ASCu (%) ASCu/TCu

Total Cu

(Mlb)

Oxide Cu

(Mlb)

Oxide 0.05 113,143,000 0.434 0.284 0.676 1,083 704

Mixed 0.05 69,918,000 0.167 0.060 0.403 245 93

Total 0.05 183,061,000 0.332 0.198 0.598 1,328 797

Based on Preliminary Economic Assessment Technical Report for the Van Dyke Copper Project", dated December 18, 2015 prepared by Moose Mountain Technical Services, J, Gray P.Eng., et al as

Qualified Persons;.

Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

Project Summary

23

• Low Cost Copper Production

• Positive Project Economics

• Excellent Infrastructure

• Considerable Potential to Expand Resource Base

• Significant increase in copper recovery possible (increase

annual copper production)

• Project Economics most sensitive to copper price and % copper

recovery

• Low Environmental and Social Impact

Contact Information

24

All statements included herein, including without limitation, statements regarding potential mineralization and exploration results, production timing and cost estimates and timing of future plans,

actions, objectives and achievements of Copper Fox Metals Inc. are "forward-looking statements" as such term is used in applicable Canadian and US securities laws. These statements relate to

analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions of management at the time the statements were made.

Actual results may differ materially from those currently anticipated. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements

contained herein are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. Elmer B. Stewart, MSc. P. Geol., President of Copper Fox, is the Company’s nominated Qualified Person pursuant to Section

3.1 of National Instrument 43-101, and has reviewed and approved the technical information disclosed herein.

Corporate Office Investor Relations

Suite 650, 340 – 12 Ave SW, 1-844-464-2820

Calgary, AB T2R 1L5 | 1-403-264-2820 investor@copperfoxmetals.com

Desert Fox Office

3445 E Highway 60,

Miami, AZ 85539-1353