Waterberg PGM Project December 9, 2016 Disclosure

TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION This presentation has been prepared by Group Metals Ltd. (“Platinum Group” or the “Company”). Information included in this presentation regarding the Company’s mineral properties has been compiled by R. Michael Jones, P.Eng, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and a non-independent Qualified Person for purposes of National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”), based on the independent technical reports, and other information filed by the Company with the Canadian securities regulators and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). For more detailed information regarding the Company and its mineral properties, you should refer to the Company’s independent technical reports and other filings with the Canadian securities regulators and the SEC, which are available at www.sedar.com and www.sec.gov, respectively. Scientific or technical information contained herein is derived from the Company’s technical reports. Technical information related to the Maseve Mine (WBJV Project 1 Platinum Mine) can be found in the July 15, 2015 press release and the Company’s Annual Information Form. Mineral Resources reflected in the July 15, 2015 press release were completed by Charles Muller of CJM Consulting, and the Mineral Reserves were prepared under the supervision of Gert Roets of DRA. A technical report with respect to the July 15, 2015 Maseve (WBJV Project 1) technical information contained herein was filed on www.sedar.com on August 28, 2015. Reference is made to such reports for more detailed information with respect to the Company’s properties, including details of quality and grade of each resource, details of the key assumptions, methods and parameters used in the resource estimates and a general discussion of the extent to which the resource estimates and the other estimates and projections included in the reports may be materially affected by any known environmental, permitting, legal, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. Scientific or technical information contained herein related to the Waterberg Project can be found in the October 19, 2016 press release. Mineral resources reflected in the October 19, 2016 press release were completed by Charles Muller of CJM Consulting. A technical report with respect to the October 19, 2016 Waterberg technical information contained herein was filed on www.sedar.com on October 19, 2016.

CAUTIONARY NOTE TO UNITED STATES INVESTORS As a Canadian issuer that is eligible to use the U.S./Canada Multijurisdictional Disclosure System (MJDS), the Company is permitted to prepare its public disclosures and this presentation in accordance with Canadian securities laws, which differ in certain respects from U.S. securities laws. In particular, this presentation uses the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource”. While these terms are recognized and required by Canadian securities laws, they are not recognized by the SEC. In addition, “reserves” reported by the Company under Canadian standards may not qualify as reserves under SEC standards. U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of a “measured mineral resource” or an “indicated mineral resource” will ever be converted into a “reserve.” Under U.S. standards, mineralization may not be classified as a “reserve” unless the mineralization can be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve determination is made. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. U.S. investors are urged to read the statement in the Offering Circular under the heading “Cautionary Note to United States Investors” for further information. Historical results or feasibility models presented herein are not guarantees or expectations of future performance. Information included in this presentation, the Company’s independent technical reports and the Company’s other public statements related to its mineral properties has been prepared in accordance with securities laws in effect in Canada, which differ from U.S. securities laws. The SEC permits U.S. mining companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only those mineral deposits that a company can economically and legally extract or produce. The Company uses certain terms in this presentation, such as “resources,” that the SEC’s guidelines strictly prohibit U.S. public companies from including in their filings with the SEC. This presentation also contains information about adjacent properties on which the Company has no right to explore or mine. The Company advises you that the SEC’s mining guidelines strictly prohibit information of this type in documents filed with the SEC. Investors are cautioned that mineral deposits on adjacent properties are not indicative of mineral deposits on the Companies properties. This presentation is not an offer to sell, or a solicitation to buy, any securities in any jurisdiction. The Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE MKT LLC have not reviewed and do not accept responsibility for the accuracy or adequacy of this presentation, which has been prepared by the Company.

1 Forward Looking Statements

Certain of the statements made herein, including statements regarding the Company’s business plans and objectives; potential exploration, development and other activities; the achievement, timing and potential ramp-up and scale of production; other economic and operational projections, estimates and assumptions, including, without limitation, revenues, costs, margin, metal prices, currency exchange rates, peak funding, cost curves, metal split, mine life, future market conditions, terms related to the Sprott working capital facility, terms related to the LMM facility and production payment and the adequacy of capital; growth potential; planned studies and reports; and the Black Empowerment (“BEE”) partner, constitute “forward looking statements” and “forward looking information” within the meaning of applicable U.S. and Canadian securities legislation (collectively, “forward looking statements”). In addition, resource estimates and feasibility study results constitute forward-looking statements to the extent that they represent, respectively, estimates of mineralization that may be encountered upon additional exploration and estimates of the capital and operating expenses, metals and currency prices and other operating conditions that may be encountered in the future.

Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that may cause the actual events or results to differ materially from those discussed in the forward- looking statements, and even if events or results discussed in the forward-looking statements are realized or substantially realized, there can be no assurance that they will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, the Company. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things: the inability of the Company to find an additional and suitable joint venture partner for the Maseve Mine (WBJV Project 1 and Project 3); failure of the Company or its joint venture partners to fund their respective pro-rata share of funding obligations; additional financing requirements; the Company’s history of losses and ability to continue as a going concern; the Company’s negative cash flow; no known mineral reserves on most of the Company’s properties; delays in, or inability to achieve, planned commercial production; discrepancies between actual and estimated mineral reserves and mineral resources, development and operating costs, metallurgical recoveries and production; fluctuations in the relative values of the Canadian dollar as compared to the South African Rand and the U.S. dollar; volatility in metal prices; the ability of the Company to retain its key management employees and skilled and experienced personnel; conflicts of interest; any disputes or disagreements with the Company’s joint venture partners; the costs of increasing BEE requirements in the Company's mining and prospecting operations; exploration, development and mining risks and the inherently dangerous nature of the mining industry, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, safety stoppages (whether voluntary or regulatory), pressures, mine collapses, cave-ins or flooding and the risk of inadequate insurance or inability to obtain insurance to cover these risks and other risks and uncertainties; property and mineral title risks including defective title to mineral claims or property; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls, regulations and political or economic developments in Canada, South Africa or other countries in which the Company does or may in the future carry out business; equipment shortages and the ability of the Company to acquire the necessary access rights and infrastructure for its mineral properties; environmental regulations and the ability to obtain and maintain necessary permits, including environmental authorizations; extreme competition in the mineral exploration industry; risks of doing business in South Africa, including but not limited to labor, economic and political instability and potential changes to legislation; and the other risks disclosed in the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended August 31, 2015, which is available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and is included as part of the Company’s Form 40-F annual report filed with the SEC at www.sec.gov. You are advised to review these risk factors, and not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

The Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or release any revisions to forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by law.

2 Overview of Platinum Group Metals Ltd. The Bushveld Complex – South Africa – 70% of Global Platinum Production

3 Waterberg PGM Project – Key Facts Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

 Steady state production rate of 744,000 4E ounces/yr in concentrate.

 Project will Produce 6% of the World’s at Low cost for 18 years plus.

 Indicated resources updated to 24.9 million 4E ounces (2.5 g/t 4E cut-off) and deposit remains open on strike to the north and below a 1,250 meter arbitrary depth cut-off.

 Probable reserves of 12.3 million platinum, palladium and rhodium ounces “4E”.

 Deposit is WIDE OPEN – District is secured.

 A 3.5 year construction period.

 Can produce fully mechanized and safely.

4 Waterberg PGM Project – Key Facts Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

 Social License achievable with minimal re-location and great up-skill opportunity.

 On site life-of-mine average cash cost of US$248 per 4E ounce including by-product credits and exclusive of smelter discounts.

 After-tax Net Present Value ("NPV") of US$320 million, at an 8% discount rate, using three-year trailing average metal prices.

 After-tax NPV of US$507 million, at an 8% discount rate, using investment bank consensus average metal prices.

 Estimated capital to full production of approximately US$1.06 billion including US$67 million in contingencies. Peak project funding estimated at US$914 million.

 After-tax IRR of 16.30% at investment bank consensus average metal prices.

 After-tax IRR of 13.50% at three-year trailing average metal prices.

5 Overview of Platinum Group Metals Ltd. Operating the Maseve Platinum Mine and Developing the Waterberg Palladium Project

. Large Scale Reserves in two Deposits in South Africa – Excellent PGM Exposure Waterberg Project . Maseve Mine: $500M USD successful completed mine build on the Western Limb commissioned in February 2016.

. Maseve Mine is in the ramp-up phase

. Waterberg: Large new reserves discovered on the North Limb in partnership with Maseve Mine PGM Floatation Mill JOGMEC.

. Pre-feasibility study confirms Waterberg as one of the largest, lowest cash cost PGM N mines globally.

. Waterberg moves now to feasibility and mining right application in 2017.

Maseve Mine. Waterberg currently funded 100% by JOGMEC

Waterberg Central Super F Long Hole Mine Plan

PLG: NYSE MKT | PTM: TSX 6 Platinum Group Metals Ltd - World Class Mineral Inventory 10.6M P&P Reserves, 20M M&I Resource and 6.4M Inferred Resource - Attributable (4E)

Reserve Ounces: 4.3 Million Reserve Ounces: 677,000 M&I Ounces: 7.8 Million M&I Ounces: 1.3 Million Inferred Ounces: 1.9 Million Inferred Ounces: 545,000

Reserve Ounces: 5.3 Million M&I Ounces: 10.4 Million Inferred Ounces: 3.8 Million

Attributable ounces based on 83% WBJV and 58.63% Waterberg ownership respectively. Mineral Reserves are a subset of the Mineral Resources. (Technical reports filed on www.sedar.com) WBJV Mineral Resources were completed by Charles Muller of CJM Consulting, and the Mineral Reserves were prepared by Gert Roets of DRA – August 28, 2015. Waterberg Mineral Resources were completed by Charles Muller of CJM Consulting – October 19, 2016. Waterberg Mineral Reserves were completed by Robert L. Goosen of Worley Parsons – October 19, 2016 WBJV 100% P&P Reserves: 4.12M ounces (“4E”) – 32.44M tonnes grading 3.95 g/t 4E (2.51 g/t Pt, 1.05 g/t Pd, 0.25 g/t Rh, 0.14 g/t Au, 2.50 g/t cut-off). WBJV 100% M&I Merensky Resource: 3.86M ounces (“4E”) – 21.82M tonnes grading 5.51 g/t 4E (3.53 g/t Pt, 1.49 g/t Pd, 0.21 g/t Rh, 0.28 g/t Au) WBJV 100% M&I UG2 Resource: 2.77M ounces (“4E”) – 22.68M tonnes grading 3.80 g/t 4E (2.39 g/t Pt, 0.99 g/t Pd, 0.38 g/t Rh, 0.04 g/t Au) Waterberg 100% Probable Reserve: 12.32M ounces (“4E”) – 102.7M tonnes grading 3.73 g/t 4E (1.11 g/t Pt, 2.29 g/t Pd, 0.29 g/t Au, 0.04 g/t Rh, 2.50 g/t cut-off). Waterberg 100% Indicated Resource: 24.886M ounces (“4E”) – 218M tonnes grading 3.55 g/t 4E (1.06g/t Pt, 2.18 g/t Pd, 0.26 g/t Au, 0.04 g/t Rh, 2.50 g/t cut-off). Waterberg 100% Inferred Resource:: 10.80M ounces (“4E”) – 97.212M tonnes grading 3.46 g/t 3E (1.03g/t Pt, 2.10g/t Pd, 0.30g/t Au, 0.03 g/t Rh , 2.50 g/t cut-off).

7 Overview of Platinum Group Metals Ltd. Share Structure and Capital Markets

Stock Symbol: PLG: NYSE MKT; PTM: TSX Share Price as of December 2016: USD $1.80 52-Week High / Low: USD $4.50 / $1.00 Issued and Outstanding: 112,803,619 Market Capitalization: USD $200M

Debt: $82.5M USD (Sprott Lending and Liberty Metals)

Analyst Coverage: BMO Capital Markets, RBC Capital Markets

Major Shareholders: Blackrock, Franklin, Liberty Metals

8 Waterberg PGM Project - Northern Limb – NEW PARADIGM Super Competitive: Large, Thick, Near Surface – 12.32M 4E Probable Reserves

 Probable Reserves stands at 12.32M 4E Ounces

 Indicated Resource 24.89M 4E and Inferred 10.82M 4E ounces.**

 Fully Mechanized Mine Plan with Decline access near surface = LOW COST

 Platinum Group 58.62% (45.65% directly + 12.97% indirectly), JOGMEC 28.35%, and BEE partner Mnombo Wethu 26%.*

 PTM in partnership with Japanese state Company JOGMEC (Japan Oil, Gas, Metals National Corp.) has discovered a new district with the potential for low-cost, safe, bulk mechanized PGM mining.

 The size and scale of the Waterberg Project represents a significant alternative to narrow width, conventional, deep Merensky and UG2 mining on the Western Limb.

* As a result of Platinum Group’s 49.9% ownership interest in Mnombo the Company has an effective interest in the Waterberg JV of 58.62%. ** See October 19, 2016 Technical Report – www.sedar.com and Appendix for tonnes and grade.

9 Waterberg PGM Project – Ownership Structure Waterberg Joint Venture: $8M Funding in Place for 2016/2017 – 100% JOGMEC

10 Waterberg PGM Project - Development Timeline Completed Pre-Feasibility in 2016 Reinforces Path to 2018 Construction Start

Complete Current Phase 2014

PEA Complete File Mining Right 2016 Application Deliverables  Proven Prefeasibility Study Business Case Action Steps 2017  No fatal-flaws  Additional exploration drilling  Forward work-  Geological modelling plan Feasibility Study  Metallurgical test work 2018-2021  EIA / EMP / Permitting Action Steps  Improve detail and  Improve business case Project Construction and Ramp-up  Perform option trade-offs confidence in engineering  Operational readiness study Deliverables  Prepare for implementation  Single Option selected  Ratified and optimised Deliverables business-case  Full detailed-design and costing  Implementation plan

The Waterberg Project has a completed PFS, Feasibility and Permitting in Progress and funded.

11 Waterberg PGM Project – Industry Cost Curve

Source: SFA (Oxford). Data for Waterberg is based on Platinum Group projections and is not representative of SFA's view

12 North Limb – Future of Global PGM Production North Limb Beats Both Western Limb and Zimbabwe – Capital, Time and Volume

Western Limb* Zimbabwe* Waterberg Average Depth 1,000 to 1,500 Metres 200 Metres 140 to 1,250 Metres Annual Throughput 2.7 MTPA 2.0 MTPA 7.2 MTPA Annual Production 180,000 Ounces Pt 90,000 Ounces Pt 744,000 Ounces 4E Time To Production 10 to 12 Years 6 Years 3.5 Years Expected Capital Investment ZAR 12B ($870M USD) $300M USD $914M USD Employees 6,000 1,000 3,300

*Source: Impala Platinum – PGM Supply Conundrum – September 14, 2016 Presentation

13 Resources and Reserves

Waterberg PGM Project

Waterberg Project: Drill Rig Mineral Resource Estimate

 Values are estimated from 298,538 meters of drilling.  303 drill holes with 483 deflections piercing the orebody.

 Strict well documented Quality Control and Assurance including blanks and standard from the field.  Assay checked with inserted standards and umpire sampling standard procedure.  Resources and Reserves are reported in accordance with the SAMREC and CIM codes.  2.5 g/t 4E cut-off for the T and F zones.

 Conversion to Reserves was done at 3 g/t 4E initially and dropped to 2.5 g/t 4E near the end of the mine life, areas with less than 20m middling from initial mining or in isolated areas were excluded.  Resources were calculated by Kriging from domains created in Datamine.  Resources were cut-off at 1,250 meter deep regardless if intercepts were available at or below this depth.

 Resources were calculated by CJM Consulting and Reserves estimated by Worley Parsons.

15 T-Zone Mineral Resource Categories Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

16 F-Zone Mineral Resource Categories Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

17 Waterberg PGM Project – Indicated Resource 24.89M ounces (4E) – 218M tonnes grading 3.55 g/t 4E

18 Waterberg PGM Project – Inferred Resource 10.80M ounces (4E) – 97.212M tonnes grading 3.46 g/t 4E

19 Waterberg PGM Project – Probable Reserve 12.32M ounces (4E) – 102.7M tonnes grading 3.73 g/t 4E

20 Waterberg PGM Project - A Unique Metal Balance Palladium Dominant, Strong Gold Content, Good Cu and Ni Credit – “Merensky Like”

21 Waterberg PGM Project - Base Metal Content Concentrate Amenable to Existing South African Smelters – Similar To

Source: Company Reports

22 Mining and Infrastructure

Waterberg PGM Project

Waterberg Project: Drill Rig Advisian/Worley Parsons Group - Credentials Martin Prior – Project Manager

 Born in Harare, Zimbabwe in 1965; Educated in South Africa  Master of Engineering (Mining)  Joined a large mining house in South Africa for 23 years  Candidate Engineer (ECSA)  Member of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (SAIMM)  Areas of expertise - Mine Planning and Design, Project Management, Project Viability Assessment.

 18 years Mine Planning and design in mining house  5 years in underground mine production with mining house.  5 years consulting experience with WorleyParsons

 Project Manager – Manganese Concept study in South Africa  Project Manager – Pre-feasibility study for a word-class Au/Cu deposit in Papua New Guinea.  Project Manager – Various deep level underground gold mine studies.

 Project Manager – Waterberg Project Pre- Feasibility Study – February 2016 to October 2016

24 Waterberg Mining Complex Portal and Underground Layouts – Flexible Declines

25 General Site Layout – Large Open Area Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

26 Project Infrastructure Power and Water are Available

 Power is planned to be delivered as needed to the site from the Eskom national grid. Initial budget work and notification for engineering to Eskom for the power to the mine has been completed.

 Power line paths have been identified and work on servitudes and permits is underway.

 The mine will have construction power from the existing 22KV, 66KV system and will upgrade to 132KV for production from 77km long power lines; 140MW maximum capacity.

 Water derived from large scale ground water sources and regional municipal waste treatment. 10 megalitres per day.

 Conservation of water was considered by various means including dry tails stacking.

 Based on available regional water and waste water, conventional TSF placement was considered the most economical. The TSF placement method is standard for the platinum industry.

 General infrastructure will include road upgrades for the shipment of concentrate and access improvement for deliveries to the site.

27 Social License

 It is envisaged the most infrastructure and mine development will be in the Ketting farm with approximately 100 homes, which will have to be relocated.

 Community consultation has been completed in exact compliance to the Mineral Resources Development Act and will assist in the compilations of the Social and Labor Plan forming part of the Mining Right application process.

 The local DMR office has been continuously involved and consulted.

 Discussions have been positive. Both the community and the company have arranged experienced mining lawyers to facilitate the negotiations.

 Community and BEE standards are good and in compliance at the project level.

PLG: NYSE | MKT PTM: TSX 28 Environmental

 The existing environmental impact assessment studies conducted for this study focused on the Ketting property .

 The main objective of the environmental studies was to provide sufficient background information on the sensitivity of the area and if mining infrastructure can be placed.

 The future development and delivery of the Waterberg Project will be underpinned by a programme of work for the mitigation of social and environmental impacts; creating value through good governance practices. Salient benefits include;

. Host rock is the same as other platinum mines. . Waste rock and tailings are non acid generating. . Tailings design includes current specifications including a plastic liner. . No rare and or protected flora and fauna in the area. . Flotation metallurgical process uses well known South African methods and reagents.

 The environmental management plan will have to ensure that all relevant local and Regional Stakeholders are adequately consulted during the planning Phase of the Project.

PLG: NYSE | MKT PTM: TSX 29 Mining Method Selection Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

 Mining Methods were selected based on the thickness and the dip.

 A modification of the Stair Step Room and Pillar Method used in the PEA was applied to increase the extraction ratio. Blind Longitudinal Retreat Method (BLR) is used to take out material between strike drives on .

 Blind Longitudinal Retreat (BLR) is for dips not exceeding 35 degrees dip and vertical thickness 3-15 meters. (25% of Total Tonnes)  Longitudinal Sub Level Open Stoping (LSLOS) >35 degrees, 3-15 m vertical thickness. (29% of Total Tonnes)  Transverse Sub Level Open Stoping (TSLOS) > 35 degrees, greater than 15m thickness. (46% of Total Tonnes).

 Three portals are used for access to five mining areas: T Zone, F South, F Central, F Boundary and F North.  T Zone and F South use the South portal.  F Central uses the Central portal.  F Boundary and F North use the North portal.

30 Mining Methods Blind Longitudinal Retreat (BLR)

31 Mining Methods Longitudinal Sub - Level Open Stoping (LSLOS)

32 Mining Methods Transverse Sub - Level Open Stoping (TSLOS)

33 Geotechnical Considerations

 Detailed Geotechnical log work on specific drill holes across the deposit were completed.

 The mining design allows for safe mining in a retreat and post mining yielding environment.

 BLR, LSLOS and TSLOS methods all allow for rock yield after extraction.

 Appropriate stope pillars and regional pillars have been provided for in the design.

 More detailed work will be required at the Definitive Feasibility Stage (DFS).

 Initial surface geo tech investigations have been completed for infrastructure locations.

 Detailed geotechnical work will be required to such level of detail that confident recommendations can be made regarding excavation layout designs and support requirements.

34 Waterberg Mining Complex F Central Declines With F Boundary and F North in the Background

35 Waterberg Mining Complex Section of Typical SLOS Transverse Layout

36 Waterberg Mining Complex T Zone Mine Design

N

37 Waterberg Mining Complex F Zone Central Mine Design

38 Mining Equipment Selection

 Appropriate Sandvik drill and support rigs, high capacity LHD’s and 40 tonne dump trucks have been specified in the mining fleet.

 Equipment is assumed to be bought new and provided to a mining contractor in the initial years of development, then taken over by the owner.  Conveyors have been installed in the mine plan shortly after the establishment of mining levels to take ore to surface.  Underground workshops have also been provided and costed to reduce travel times to maintain the fleet.  Mobile equipment lease is an opportunity for reduced capital and sustaining capital.

39 Metallurgy and Processing

Waterberg PGM Project

Waterberg Project: Drill Rig Turnberry Projects - Credentials Gordon Cunningham – Independent Engineering - Qualified Person

 Born in Brisbane, Australia in 1953.  Educated in Australia.  Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical).  Relocated to South Africa in 1975.  Joined a large mining house in South Africa for 25 years.  Professional Engineer (ECSA).  Fellow of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FSAIMM).  Qualified Person for NI43-101.  Competent Person for SAMREC.  19 years Metallurgical Production & Management.  Gold, base metals, platinum concentration, platinum smelting, base metal refining, tin, coal, copper & cobalt leaching.  4 years design and consulting in mining house.  2 years in production.  16 years private consulting.

41 Metallurgy – Completed by DRA Global and Turnberry Projects Experienced in PGM Plants

 Extensive work on T Zone, F Zone and Co-Mingled Ore was completed.  Four Phases of Metallurgical Tests from 2014 to 2016 were completed at Mintek, South Africa  JOGMEC also completed Metallurgical study.  Master Composites were used to investigate a range of parts of the orebody at a range of grades.  Closed Cycle and Open Cycle Tests were completed.  Various Concentrate recoveries and various concentrate grades were produced.  Balance of higher recovery and lower concentrate grade versus slight lower recovery for higher concentrate grade will be optimized with off-take discussions.  80 g/t 4E grades + with 80% + recoveries are achievable.

 PFS Process recovery is based on:

 2X 300 ktpm MF-2 Concentrators.  Mine Schedule Blended Grades and Ore Types.  Ramp up Commissioning losses of 3% 1 month after start up, 2% 2 and 3 months after start-up and 1% in months 4 and 5 after start up.  A lined TSF in accordance with current rules – proposed changes could result in $20M+ lower cost.

42 Metallurgical Drill Sample Locations Across the Deposit T and F Zones

43 Blend Samples and Mineralogy

 T and F Zone blend samples were created.  First sample at life of mine expected portions: 25% T Zone, 25% F Zone Central Upper, 25% F Zone Central Lower and 25% F Boundary.  A second sample was created with the same zone blends.  A third sample was created with 50% T Zone and 50% F Zone Central.

 SEM and QEMSCAN Analysis were completed for the various T Zone, F Central, F Boundary and F North parts of the deposit.  Normal grain size distribution work was completed.  Fast Floating and Slow Floating analysis was completed.  Mineral types were also studied in detail with Electron Micro Probe work at Wits University.  Pt/Pd arsenides and Pd bismuth tellurides with minor Pt sulphides are common.  Dominant base metal sulphide minerals are chalcopyrite and pentlandite.

 XRF analysis did not reveal any deleterious elements.  Chromitite content in concentrate is extremely low.

44 Metallurgy - Extensive Test Work Completed Variability of Ore Types Considered

 Extensive test work has been completed on two different flow sheets MF-1 and MF-2.

 Encouraging results from both MF-1 and MF-2 flow sheets.

 Best recoveries from MF-2.

 Lower capital costs on MF-1.

 Limited test work on ore variability has been completed, further work is recommended as optimization opportunity should be considered.

 Comminution tests have been completed on the various ore types – ore is not amenable to SAG milling therefore a crushing plant is included.

 High level of instrumentation planned to mix ore types and optimize flows.

45 Metallurgy – Mill Design Standard MF2 Design - Two 300 Ktpm Mills

46 Waterberg Mill Design Flow Sheet – Standard South Africa MF-2 Flotation Design

Cone Crushing Mill Feed Primary Ball Primary Rougher Secondary Ball Secondary Rougher Scavenger Flotation Primary Crushing and Screening Storage Milling Flotation Milling Flotation Circuit

Primary Cleaning/ Secondary Cleaning/ Scavenger Cleaning Tailings Thickening ReCleaning Circuit ReCleaning Circuit Circuit & Disposal

High grade Medium grade concentrate Low grade concentrate concentrate Concentrate Thickening Underground Air Services Water ROM material ROM Storage

Concentrate Filtration and Water Services & TSF & Return Water Reagents Discpatch Reticulation Phase 1

ROM Storage Concentrate Thickening Phase 2 High grade Low grade concentrate Medium grade concentrate concentrate

Primary Cleaning Scavenger Cleaning Tailings Thickening Secondary Cleaning Circuit Circuit Circuit & Disposal

Cone Crushing Mill Feed Primary Ball Primary Rougher Secondary Ball Secondary Rougher Scavenger Flotation Primary Crushing and Screening Storage Milling Flotation Milling Flotation Circuit

47 Metallurgical Recovery and Attractive Concentrate to be Produced Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

48 Metallurgy Conclusions Good Recovery, Good Grades, Attractive Concentrate

 Extensive test work has been completed.

 Opportunity for further optimization is possible.

 Good recoveries of 80% + have been achieved with an attractive 80 g/t 4E concentrate grade.

 The concentrate is attractive in the local South Africa Market – low chrome – good grade.

 Importantly base metal levels of the resulting product is similar to the Merensky particularly on the planned blended T and F Reef.

 No deleterious elements have been found.

49 Metallurgy Conclusions Good Recovery, Good Grades, Attractive Concentrate

 Consumptions of balls and reagents is not estimated to be outside normal ranges.

 The grinding power requirements are high and optimization of this will be an important part of the next study.

 Multiple ore type blends have been tested successfully with head grades from 2.5 - 4.2 g/t 4E.

 The plant design has included 2 X 300 ktpa mills for flexibility on ramp up rates.

 Both an MF-1 and MF-2 circuit have been tested with good results. A lower capital MF-1 option can be considered.

50 Financial Overview

Waterberg PGM Project

Waterberg Project: Drill Rig Financial Model Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

 Based on the current design Waterberg will be one of the lowest cost PGM mines in the world.

 There is unused capacity in RSA smelters and the project’s sulphide concentrate is highly attractive.

 Smelter processing is a significant proportion of costs and also represent an attractive opportunity if smelting were to be integrated into the project.

 The financial model has been completed in 2016 ZAR.

 The ZAR/USD exchange rate has been modelled flat at 15 ZAR to the USD – flat for the 18 year mine life.

 Escalation of costs in ZAR terms versus USD is expected to be offset by devaluation of the currency. This model approach has been reliable since 2008.

52 Total Mine Production Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

53 Total Ounces Produced Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

54 Recovered Metal in Concentrate Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

Recovered Metal in $/OZ/Lb US$ 000's Revenue Portion IB Cons. Platinum kozpa 222 1,213 269,286 32% Palladium kozpa 472 800 377,600 45% Gold kozpa 45 1,300 58,500 7% Rhodium kozpa 6 1,000 6,000 1% 4E kozpa 744 960 Copper Mlbpa 11 2.90 31,900 4% Nickel Mlbpa 12 7.50 90,000 11%

$ 833,286 100%

55 Capital Cost Summary Total Capital

56 Life of Mine Capital Cost Summary

57 Life of Mine Average R/t Operating Cost 574 Rand per Tonne/USD $38.27 (15R/USD)

58 LoM Average R/t Operating Cost Breakdown per Cost Category Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

59 Waterberg PGM Project – LOW COST 4E Cash Costs - Before and After Credits and Smelter Costs

Low Cost Globally – Smelter cost is significant part of overall costs

US$/oz 4E in Concentrate

Item Life-of- 5-Year 10-Year Mine Average Average Average 2022 - 2026 2022 - 2031 Mine Site Cash Cost 389 390 374 Nickel Credits 98 97 98 Copper Credits 42 40 40 Total Mine Cash Costs After Credits 248 253 236 Realisation cost (smelter “cost”, transport) 232 224 231 Total Cash Costs After Credits 481 477 467

60 Waterberg PGM Project – Industry Cost Curve

Source: SFA (Oxford). Data for Waterberg is based on Platinum Group projections and is not representative of SFA's view

61 Financial Model Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

 NPV is modelled back to January 2017.

 Costs have been developed from first principles and compared to recent detailed bench mark pricing.

 PGM’s have been modelled on 3 year trailing average from July 2016 and on Investment Bank forward consensus compiled by BMO.

 Labour numbers and costs are low compared to other platinum mines as a result of high mechanization – costs are less subject to local escalation.

62 Economic Assumptions Rand 15/USD$ Flat - No Escalation

Investment 3 Year Bank Trailing Consensus Parameter Unit Average Price

Platinum USD/oz 1,212 1,213 Palladium USD/oz 710 800 Gold USD/oz 1,229 1,300 Rhodium USD/oz 984 1,000 T and F Combined Basket (4E) USD/oz 899 960 Nickel USD/lb 6.10 7.50 Copper USD/lb 2.56 2.90

PGM Smelter Payabilty % Gross Sales Pay 85% Copper Payability % Gross Sales Pay 73% Nickel Payability % Gross Sales Pay 68%

Rand devaluation assumed to equal excess South African cost escalation

63 Annual Cash Flow After Tax Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

64 Financial Returns Three Year Trailing Average Price Deck 15R/USD

ZAR Millions Discount (Before ZAR Millions USD Millions USD Millions Item Rate Tax) (After Tax) (Before Tax) (After Tax) Net Present Undiscounted 36,096 25,042 2,406 1,669 Value 4.0% 18,213 11,883 1,214 792 6.0% 12,666 7,808 844 520 8.0% 8,565 4,805 571 320 10.0% 5,519 2,584 368 172 12.0% 3,249 939 217 62 14.0% 1,555 -278 104 -19 Internal Rate of Return Project Payback Period 16.6% 13.5% 16.6% 13.5% (Years) from 2017 10 10 10 10

65 Financial Returns Investment Consensus Price Deck 15R/USD

Before Discount Tax After Tax Before Tax After Tax Item Rate (ZAR M) (ZAR M) (USD M) (USD M) Net Present Undiscounted 45,781 31,946 3,052 2,130 Value 4.0% 24,180 16,184 1,612 1,079 6.0% 17,426 11,263 1,162 750 8.0% 12,402 7,610 827 507 10.0% 8,641 4,884 576 325 12.0% 5,812 2,842 387 189 14.0% 3,676 1,311 245 87 Internal Rate of Return Project Payback Period 19.8% 16.3% 19.8% 16.3% (Years) from 2017 9 9 9 9

66 IRR Sensitivity – Post Tax Pre-Feasibility Study – October 2016

67 Conclusions

 Indicated Resources:

31.5 Mt at 3.88 g/t 4E for the T Zone, 186.7 Mt at 3.49 g/t 4E on the F Zone.

 The Waterberg Mine provides large scale PGM production of 744,000 ounces 4E/year and an 18 year mine life.

 The deposit remains open and the resource is significantly larger than the reserves.

 The Waterberg Project will produce flotation concentrate with 80% plus recoveries, 80 g/t plus for the South African market.

 Estimated payability - 85% for the PGEs and 73% for copper and 68% for nickel.

 Sulphide based concentrate attractive for local smelters without plant modifications

68 Conclusions

 Project financial returns after tax are 16% IRR on broker consensus and 13% on three year trailing average prices.

 The project is recommended to proceed to the Feasibility Stage and application for a mining right.

 Opportunities in the downstream production of matte should be investigated for increased returns.

 Project is a long-term, low cost, secure, steady source of PGMs including 6% of global palladium.

69 Waterberg PGM Project - Resources Mineral Resource Estimate – T-Zone and F-Zone – October 19, 2016

T-Zone 2.5 g/t Cut-off Cut-off Grade Metal Tonnage Resource Category 4E Pt Pd Au Rh 4E Cu Ni 4E g/t Mt g/t g/t g/t g/t g/t % % Kg Moz

Indicated 2.5 31.540 1.13 1.90 0.81 0.04 3.88 0.16 0.08 122,375 3.934

Inferred 2.5 19.917 1.10 1.86 0.80 0.03 3.79 0.16 0.08 75,485 2.427

F-Zone 2.5 g/t Cut-off Cut-off Grade Metal Tonnage Resource Category 4E Pt Pd Au Rh 4E Cu Ni 4E g/t Mt g/t g/t g/t g/t g/t % % Kg Moz

Indicated 2.5 186.725 1.05 2.23 0.17 0.04 3.49 0.07 0.16 651,670 20.952

Inferred 2.5 77.295 1.01 2.16 0.17 0.03 3.37 0.04 0.12 260,484 8.375

70 Waterberg PGM Project - Resources Total Mineral Resource Estimate – October 19, 2016

Waterberg Total 2.5 g/t Cut-off

Cut-off Grade Metal Resource Tonnage Category 4E Pt Pd Au Rh 4E Cu Ni 4E g/t Mt g/t g/t g/t g/t g/t % % Kg Moz

Indicated 2.5 218.265 1.06 2.18 0.26 0.04 3.55 0.08 0.15 774,045 24.886

Inferred 2.5 97.212 1.03 2.10 0.30 0.03 3.46 0.06 0.11 335,969 10.802

4E = Platinum Group Elements (Pt+Pd+Rh+Au). The cut-offs for mineral resources have been established by a qualified person after a review of potential operating costs and other factors. The mineral resources stated above are shown on a 100% basis, that is, for the Waterberg Project as a whole entity. Conversion Factor used – kg to oz = 32.15076. Numbers may not add due to rounding. Resources do not have demonstrated economic viability. A 5% and 7% geological loss has been applied to the Indicated and Inferred categories respectively. Effective Date Oct 17, 2016. Metal prices used in the reserve estimate are as follows based on a 3-year trailing average (as at July 31/2016) in accordance with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") guidance for the assessment of resources; US$1,212/oz Pt, US$710/oz Pd, US$1229/oz Au, US$984/oz Rh, US$6.10/lb Ni, US$2.56/lb Cu, US$/ZAR15.

Total aggregate mineral resources at Waterberg on a 100% project basis have increased slightly since those reported in April 2016. Inferred category resources have decreased to an estimated 10.8 million 4E ounces from 11.71 million ounces 4E Inferred in April, 2016. Indicated category resources have increased to an estimated 24.9 million 4E ounces, from 23.9 million 4E ounces Indicated in April 2016:

1. The mineral resources are classified in accordance with the SAMREC standards. There are certain differences with the "CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves"; however, in this case the QP believes the differences are not material and the standards may be considered the same. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability and Inferred resources have a high degree of uncertainty. 2. The mineral resources are provided on a 100% project basis and Inferred and Indicated categories are separate and the estimates have an effective date of 17 October 2016. 3. A cut-off grade of 2.5 g/t 4E for both the T and the F-Zones is applied to the selected base case mineral resources. 4. Cut off for the T and the F-Zones considered costs, smelter discounts, concentrator recoveries from previous engineering work completed on the property by the Company. The resource model was cut-off at an arbitrary depth of 1,250 meters, although intercepts of the deposit do occur below this depth. 5. Mineral resources were completed by Mr. CJ Muller of CJM Consulting. 6. Mineral resources were estimated using kriging methods for geological domains created in Datamine from 303 original holes and 483 deflections. A process of geological modelling and creation of grade shells using indicating kriging was completed in the estimation process. 7. The estimation of mineral resources has taken into account environmental, permitting and legal, title, and taxation, socio-economic, marketing and political factors. 8. The mineral resources may be materially affected by metals prices, exchange rates, labor costs, electricity supply issues or many other factors detailed in the Company's Annual Information Form. 9. The data that formed the basis of the estimate are the drill holes drilled by Platinum Group, which consist of geological logs, the drill hole collars surveys, the downhole surveys and the assay data. The area where each layer was present was delineated after examination of the intersections in the various drill holes. 10. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource not included in the current reserves will be upgraded and converted to a mineral reserve.

71 Waterberg PGM Project - Reserves Mineral Reserve Estimate – October 19, 2016

Probable Mineral Reserve at 2.5 g/t 4E Cut-off – Tonnage and Grades

Cut-off Pt Zone Mt grade Pd (g/t) Au (g/t) Rh (g/t) 4E (g/t) Cu (%) Ni (%) (g/t) (g/t)

T-Zone 16.5 2.5 1.14 1.93 0.83 0.04 3.94 0.16 0.08

F-Zone 86.2 2.5 1.11 2.36 0.18 0.04 3.69 0.07 0.16

Total 102.7 2.5 1.11 2.29 0.29 0.04 3.73 0.08 0.15

Probable Mineral Reserve at 2.5 g/t Cut-off – Contained Metal

4E Pt Pd Au Rh 4E Zone Mt content Cu (Mlb) Ni (Mlb) (Moz) (Moz) (Moz) (Moz) (Moz) (kg)

T-Zone 16.5 0.61 1.03 0.44 0.02 2.09 65,097 58.21 29.10 F-Zone 86.2 3.07 6.54 0.51 0.10 10.22 318,007 132.97 303.94 Total 102.7 3.67 7.57 0.95 0.12 12.32 383,103 191.18 333.04

72 Platinum Group Metals Ltd.

Suite 788 – 550 Burrard Street Vancouver, BC V6C 2V5 Canada +1 604-899-5450 [email protected] www.platinumgroupmetals.net ______

Platinum Group Metals RSA (Pty) Ltd. 1st Floor, Platinum House 24 Sturdee Avenue Rosebank, Johannesburg 2196 SA