A Gold Miner in the Making March 2017 2 Forw rward Looking In - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Goose Gold Project, Back River, Nunavut, Canada A Gold Miner in the Making March 2017

2 Forw rward Looking In Information Statements relating to our belief as to the timing of completion of the environmental assessment, the results of the final public hearings, the timing of receipt of a project certificate and permits and the timing of the start of construction and the first gold pour, and the results of further optimization studies to the feasibility study, the potential tonnage and grades and contents of deposits and the potential production from and viability of Sabina’s properties are forward looking information within the meaning of securities legislation of certain Provinces in Canada. Forward looking information are statements that are not historical facts and are generally, but not always identified by the words “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “projects,” “potential,” “opportunities,” and similar expressions, or that events or conditions “will,” “would . ” “may,” “could,” or should occur. The forward looking information is made of the date of this presentation. This forward looking information is subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties which could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward looking information, including, without limitation: the effects of general economic conditions; changing foreign exchange rates; risks associated with exploration and project development; the calculation of mineral resources and reserves; risks related to fluctuations in metal prices; uncertainties related to raising sufficient financing to fund the planned work in a timely manner and on acceptable terms; changes in planned work arising from weather, logistical, technical or other factors; the possibility that results of work will not fulfill expectations and realize the perceived potential of the Company’s properties; risk of accidents, equipment breakdowns and labour disputes; access to project funding or other unanticipated difficulties or interruptions; the possibility of cost overruns or unanticipated expenses in the work program; title matters; government regulation; obtaining and receiving necessary licenses and permits; the risk of environmental contamination or damage resulting from Sabina’s operations and other risks and uncertainties including those described in Sabina’s annual information form for the year ended December 31, 2016 available at www.sedar.com Forward looking information is based on the beliefs, estimates and opinions of Sabina’s management on the date the statements are made. Sabina undertakes no obligation to update the forward looking information should management’s beliefs, estimates or opinions, or other factors, change, except as required by applicable law

3 Key y In Investment Hig ighli lights A scarcity of gold and de-risked gold projects make Sabina one of the few highly leveraged undervalued opportunities • Regional scale (80km belt) • Attractive to producers looking to replenish supply • Large high grade resource/reserve • Exceptional team • Pro-responsible development • ~C$45 million in cash and equivalents • Feasibility complete • Robust at US$1150 gold and C$0.80 • Strong community support

4 Back River Property Back k Riv iver Gold ld Belt lt Bath DISTRICT OPPORTUNITY LEGEND Camp Current Mine Life ~ 12 years Area of Interest Claim LOM Gold Production 2.3M oz Lease M&I 5,333M oz Au Inuit Owned Land Surface Inferred 1,851M oz Au Subsurface and Surface Significant extended production George Project opportunities exist through: 80 Km • Deposits not included in FS plan (at both Goose and George) Boulder Boot • Low risk resource conversion opportunities Goose Project • Direct extensional potential for all deposits • Numerous blue sky brownfield targets Del • Continued greenfield and generative 0 12.5 25 exploration future Kilometres

5 Back k Riv iver – Deposit its are Well ll Drille illed and Well ll Understood Mineral Resource Estimate Oct/14 Tonnes (kt) Au (g/t) Metal (koz Au) Gold Resource Indicated Inferred Millions oz Measured 10,273 5.27 1,740 8 Indicated 17,969 6.22 3,593 Under Sabina 7 Ownership Measured and Indicated 28,242 5.87 5,333 6 5 Inferred 7,750 7.43 1,851 4 3 Mineral Reserve Estimate Aug/15 Classification Tonnes (kt) Au (g/t) Au (koz) 2 Proven 6,983 5.97 1,340 Total Open Pit 1 Probable 1,885 5.52 335 Proven 20 9.52 6 0 Total Underground Probable 3,471 7.37 822 1998 2002 2007 2009 2010 2012 2015 Proven 7,003 5.98 1,346 Total Back River Property Probable 5,356 6.72 1,157 1980’s & 90s 1997-2009 June 2009 2010-2014 George & Goose Project owned by Arauco, Project acquired +325% resource deposit discoveries Kinross, Miramar & DPM by Sabina growth under Sabina 80% of open pit reserve is in Proven Category *See mineral reserves and resources estimate slide 29 for details

6 Back k Riv iver – World ld Cla lass Grade • Highest grade undeveloped open pits • The only high-grade project with a major open pit component (72% OP, 28% UG) +5 Moz Development Gold Assets in the Americas Total Resource gold grade g/t UG 15.77 15 UG 10 8.67 OP/UG 6.21 UG/OP UG/OP OP OP 5 OP OP 3.26 3.06 OP OP 2.67 2.30 1.65 1.60 1.04 1.03 0 Notes: Total 2P, Measured, Indicated & Inferred gold resources larger than ~5 million ounces; excludes by-products. Source: Company Technical Reports

7 Process To Date Event Date Start of Permitting 2012 Final EIS Submitted 2015 Final Public Hearings – (Regulators, GN, GNWT, KIA, Community Representatives April 2016 all agree project should proceed) NIRB Recommendation to INAC – Project should not proceed at this time June 2016 INAC Disagrees with NIRB. Project sent back for further review Jan 2017 Sabina Files FEIS Addendum Feb 16, 2017 NIRB Formally Accepts FEIS Addendum – Provides timeline Feb 23, 2017

8 Goin ing Forw rward – NIR IRB Tim imeli line What happens next? Event Date “[it is]… our intention to ensure that NIRB initiates the Technical Review of the project proposal and the assessment would be expeditious Feb 23, 2017 requests final written submissions from interested parties and would result in a new report which NIRB issues notice of Final Hearing (60 day public notice Mar 2017 focuses on the areas of deficiencies requirement) identified by the Ministers (rather than Parties submit final written submissions to the NIRB Apr 24, 2017 all aspects of the previous assessment Sabina submits its response to final written submissions to NIRB May 15, 2017 being revisited).” NIRB facilitates a Technical Meeting via teleconference (optional May 24, 2017 step to be utilized if deemed necessary/appropriate) Ryan Barry Executive Director, NIRB Parties file presentations for Final Hearing (tentative date only) May 27, 2017 May 31 – Jun 3, NIRB Final Hearing (tentative dates only) 2017 NIRB issues the updated Final Hearing Report for the Back River Jul 2017 Project proposal.

9 Addendum to FEIS File iled wit ith NIR IRB Feb 16/17 Area Concern Updated Submission To NIRB Caribou and Although Project does not come into contact Enhanced Wildlife Mitigation and Monitoring Plan including additional with Bathurst Herd and has little overlap with operational slow-down measures for large groups of caribou and in -case of Terrestrial Wildlife Beverly Herd, if Caribou change migration the a shift in migration and calving grounds. Comparisons to other arctic project could have a negative impact on projects showing best in class approach. Completed detailed third party declining caribou herd populations. reviews with industry experts. Freshwater Aquatic How can we minimize impacts on fish Updated plans for draining lakes/ponds and removal of fish from populations in the project area? waterbodies affected by the project, additional detail also provided on plans Environment for to offset removal of fish by providing increased access for fish in other areas. (Program at Bernard Harbour). Regulatory oversight for bulk fuel shipping, and Enhanced detail on plans for bulk fuel transport and transfer at the Marine Marine Environment being able to respond quickly enough should Laydown Area, as well as additional detail on emergency response planning. there be accidents/spills. Further detail and clarity provided on responsibilities of various government ministries. Quality and handling of project contact water. Enhanced detail and clarification on site water quality objectives, including Water Quality additional discussions with regulators and comparisons to other arctic (Ground and Surface) projects. Impact of climate change on waste rock and Comparison to other Arctic projects showing best in class approach and Climate and tailings storage after the mine has closed adaptive management plans (increased monitoring of rock to be able to Meteorology (permafrost warming). mitigate before negative events happen). Completed detailed third party reviews with industry experts.