Mr. Michael England reports

ALIX RECEIVES PERMITS TO DRILL HISTORICAL LITHIUM RESOURCE AT JACKPOT LITHIUM PROPERTY, ONTARIO

Alix Resources Corp. has been granted by the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) drill permits for the company's Jackpot lithium property located in the Georgia Lake area within the Thunder Bay mining division in Ontario. It is anticipated that drilling will commence shortly to confirm the historical drilling and the continuity and extent of the near-surface No. 1 zone, with the ultimate goal directed toward defining an NI 43-101-compliant resource estimate.

President and chief executive officer Michael England commented: "Our exploration program is targeting ground with historical drilling and exploration; that coupled with our own exploration work on the property provides us with a clear direction for leveraging our drilling dollars to achieve maximum results from this program. It is the company's goal to begin proving up, and working to expand historic lithium resources at Jackpot."

The Jackpot lithium deposits was described by E.G. Pye in a 1965 report published by the Ontario Department of Mines on the Georgia Lake area. The deposits were tested by a total of 32 holes drilled in 1955 by Ontario Lithium Company Ltd. and its associated company Conwest Exploration Co. Ltd. The drilling confirmed the presence of at least two spodumene-bearing pegmatite bodies, one at the surface (No. 1) and the other (No. 2) lying directly beneath the No. 1 deposit. Historical resources at Jackpot, comprising only the No. 2 dike-pegmatite zone, was reported as two metric tons at 1.09 lithium oxide estimated in 1956 by Ontario Lithium Company. The No. 2 pegmatite dike, which was discovered by diamond drilling, was intersected at 30-to-100-metre intervals over a strike length of 215 metres and at 30-to-60-metre intervals over a distance of 365 metres across strike. Dike No. 2 is four to 20 metres thick, averaging 11 metres.

The estimates presented above are treated as historical information, and have not been verified or relied upon for economic evaluation by the company. These historical mineral resources do not refer to any category of sections 1.2 and 1.3 of the NI 43-101 instrument such as mineral resources or mineral reserves as stated in the 2010 CIM definition standards on mineral resources and mineral reserves. The explanation lies in the inability by the company to verify the data acquired by the various historical drilling campaigns. The company has not done sufficient work yet to classify the historical estimates as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.

The technical contents of this release were approved by Michel Boily, PhD, PGeo, a qualified person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. The properties have not been the subject of an NI 43-101 report.

We seek Safe Harbor.