Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Agnico-Eagle Mines year end 2009 results webcast conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session with instructions provided. (Operator Instructions). I would like to remind everyone that this conference call is being recorded today Thursday, February 18, 2010 at 11 am Eastern Time. And I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Sean Boyd, Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you operator, and good morning, everyone, and I know it's a busy day for all of you. There is a number of calls and releases coming out. So, we'll move through our slide but what we wanted to try to do is just give you an overview of the quarter and how positioned us going forward. As you know, we continue to optimize our newly built mines. We've seen a significant improvement at many of our operations which has been reflected in very strong Q4 results. However, we continue to optimize going through 2010 and we are also very focused on commissioning the newest mine Meadowbank and that commissioning process is underway. But as we optimize the operations, we continue to analyze, we continue to study several internal expansion opportunities and we'll be talking about those as we move through 2010 and they have the potential to increase our output over the next several years as we move through this five year phase of continued growth and what that will do because there are internal opportunities that can be funded through internal resources that will allow us to drive our per share metrics production per share and ultimately cash flow per share. But also another area of focus for us is exploration. There is a 40% increase as you know in our exploration budgets in 2010. We're focused principally on converting more resource into reserves. We saw a big bump in our resource and we're also focused on extending the resource outlined at several of our deposits. So, from a highlight standpoint, strong earnings, strong cash flow in the quarter driven by record quarterly production and very good cash cost which came in below $300, also we saw the reserve in resource position grow to a combined $30 million.…

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from Tony Lesiak of Genuity Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Good morning Sean, Dave, Ebe everyone. My first question is on Pinos Altos and on the reserve and resource statement. Could you give me a sense of how much resource was associated with the new targets at Cubiro, Santo, Sinter and San Eligio?

Mark?

Essentially, that's where we found most of the ounces in 2009 and we're going to be exploring 2010.

We find (inaudible) on Cubiro and Sinter, and Cubiro is a bit complicate (inaudible)

Was there any change in the Creston resource or reserve?

No.

Nothing, okay. On heap recoveries, it looks like they declined in the quarter. Can you comment on that and whether or not you're looking at any changes to the mine plant?

Well, its pretty early days, the lead cycle for this core is over a year, get anywhere close to stay.

Tim, can you get closer to the microphone, you are breaking up.

Okay. The lead cycle for the Pinos Altos heap leech ore is more than a year. So, it will take us a year to get stable with our recovery and there is not a decline in recovery, there is just a change in the throughput. We have some throughput issues with lead ore and we have less tonnes going on with that and rest are being… This very past lead cycle for Pinos Altos heap leach is a little more than a year. So, it will take a year to get the recovery stabilized and normalized, and we didn't see a drop in recovery, we saw a drop in tonnes going to the pad and fresh ore being leached and we have a little bit bigger inventory on the pad right now. We're not concerned about it.

Your next question comes from John Bridges of JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

I was just nitpicking really on Lapa. You're talking about the dilution but increased grind costs. That's an interesting mix. Just wondering if perhaps Ebe had some explanation as to what's actually going on. I'm just intrigued.

You are the grinding expert.

The grind cost is really but with the throughput currently we are in the last quarter we were not at 1,500 tonnes per day and we are currently at 1,500 tonnes per day. Its one cost related, typically presently the client is in good mode of optimization and the cost will decrease presently in the (inaudible).

Its related to the narrow vein is it more than anything else?

I would say it's more related to optimizing the overall circuit and over the quarter we averaged just under 1,200 tonnes per day. We are currently averaging over 1,600 tonnes per day so the cost on the unit basis will decline. So it's a bit of an aberration.

Your next question comes from John Flanagan of Fundamental Equity. Please go ahead.

Sean in view of the much entire capital cost of building Meadowbrook, does the return on investment still seem attractive at these gold prices and what is the total investment now?

Well the total investment in terms of construction CapEx was about $700 million. We made the decision to build it and buy it when gold prices were $525 an ounce. So the rate of return is higher now than it was when we made the decision to go ahead with that project. Also as we've seen in the recent reserve and resource update, we've seen a significant increase of over 30% in the overall mineralized envelope, up to now exceeding 7.7 million ounces. We made a decision to buy it and build it; it was around 3 million ounces.

So the ROI meets your standard?

That's correct, yes.

Your next question comes from Ray [Foss] of private investor. Please go ahead.

I simply wanted to confirm that your resource increases are coming from internal exploration as opposed to acquisition of exploration companies, correct?

That's correct. We spent about $60 million in exploration in 2009. A good portion of that was on the existing property portfolio and that's where we saw the increase in their resource and the conversion of resource to reserve.

Your next question is a follow-up from Tony Lesiak. Please go ahead.

Yeah, good morning. Another follow-up on the Pinos Altos. The 5,000 tonne a day mil capacity that you're talking about, would that be available from 2011 on?

Yes.

So, obviously, there could be some changes in the guidance that you put out in December.

Well we will be in bit of a transition from the open pit into the underground, so that will be part of our expansion study. So, I think it's a bit too early to say that but definitely having the extra capacity available sooner rather than later is a plus.

Okay. Any Ebe I got you the ramp up at Meadowbank, is it safe to assume that may be out of the 300,000 ounces may be a 100 comes in the first half, 200 in the second?

I would say that would be reasonable.

Okay. And final question for David, there was an inventory adjustment of about $16 million on each of the mines to calculate cash costs. Can you elaborate on that?

Yes, there were three metals where we produced more than we sold gold, zinc and silver and essentially those are the inventory adjustments associated with the stockpiling or build up of inventory in those three metals.

Okay, so there was nothing else in there?

No, not really.

This is a follow-up Tony, on your question in terms of December update. What we hope to have based on working and analyzing several internal extension opportunity is to have a lot of that work done as we move into the fourth quarter so that we can incorporate it in that update and (inaudible) what these things like, Pinos Altos moving above their current rate of capacity of 400,000 tons a day, a potential new satellite zone that will go into construction in 2011 and production likely in 2012. We need to work out the details, but it looks like its like the center. We'll have a good sense then of Meadowbank and its ability to go to 10,000 tons a day. And we'll also have a good sense of where we're headed in terms of Kittila. We may not have all the final numbers, but what we are trying to do is to work through a timeline this year, where we need to make modest investments of $5 million to preorder some equipment ahead of announcing some updated production profile. We can do that and get that in the pipeline sooner, rather than later.

Your next question comes from Steven Butler of Canaccord

Question for you on Kittila. A nice reserve increase as you booked, and were sort of expected to book. In terms of that reserve increase, is it justified or supported by an incremental capital cost for either shaft or just simply ramping down further, deeper? Thanks. And how much?

It is justified by ramping down. This is part of our trade-off study to over the long-term whether we can justify shaft. So these reserves are just based on operating cost and extending the existing mine.

So, normal course maintenance capital levels, nothing tremendous?

That's how this is involved however at the current tonnage rate but we are evaluating significantly higher tonnage rates and if we do that then there will be accelerated development and sustaining capital would increase.

Your next question comes from Barry Cooper of CIBC

Question for Ebe or Tim if he's still on the line there. Just looking at Pinos Altos, I know the silver recoveries have been an issue there and knowing right from the get go, I think you're anticipating 48%, 50% recovery, but your gold recovery seems to have come up nicely. Silver recoveries not so much, at least right now. I'm just wondering is that a situation where you focused on the gold and will now focus on getting the silver recoveries up or perhaps what we're seeing is that the silver recoveries are just a little bit more difficult than where it was initially anticipated? Could you flush out some of the details there?

I think it's fair to say we have been focusing on gold recovery and also we're running the mill right now with a little bit lower cyanide in the late circuit and to make a long story short that's to help us out with our filtration solution or the pulp chemistry and the filtration. So we shall see improvements in the silver recovery long-term and this hasn't been a huge focus for us early.

Your next question comes from Chantal Gosselin of Sun Valley Gold. Please go ahead.

I noticed that at five of the six assets, the reserve decreased but the grade increased and the reason provided is higher projection for operating costs, which presumably increased the cutoff grade. Could you share your assumptions in cost that you were used for calculating those cut upgrades and are they different from your last guidance?

I can touch on just internal and then Marc, you can help me with that. I don't think your statements of the five mines is entirely correct. If you look at Goldex, we maintained the reserves at LaRonde. I think we were down 3% and the upside potential on LaRonde is at depth and until we get the development in place then we will be able to drill more. I think so people on the reserves went up at Meadowbank they were flat. So I think the only place where we had issues with the reserve statement were at Lapa and at Pinos Altos. And at Lapa, yes the cutoff grade did go up because of cost pressure, higher cost because of significantly higher ground control than what we had originally planned for in the feasibility but also when we definition drilled some of the zones at depth, we found them to be too irregular and therefore did not meet our criteria for mining also with respect to Pinos Altos the western part of the Santo Nino pit that tended to be significantly more irregular than we had and disjointed them what we had planned originally. So this material tended to be lower grade and therefore once again did not make our cut off projections. So maybe Mark you can add more color to that?

Yeah, its in effect of a large part as when you look at the tables the differences is LaRonde is only natural I mean we produced, we extracted almost 250,000 ounces of rock to produce that 225. So there was at LaRonde we are not seeing any increases in the reserves area with its depletion. As a matter of fact it only depleted by 125, so we actually got more ounces back despite of lower base metal credit. So, you are rightly either Lapa is the key factor, Pinos Altos is less than 5% decrease. So, watch to the rest of them.

Ok. I guess I should have rephrased my question. Five of the six were a decrease or flat but if you look at the comment at Lapa and Pinos Altos and Meadowbank, seems like you have used a higher cutoff grade. Is the operating cost projection used in those cutoff grade, is it different from your last guidance?

I believe that Ebe had essentially know we've guided that in December.

Ok. So, its all there. The costs per tons were pretty much the same as your last guidance?

That is correct and then I can also add to that, part of the sort of internal question that we have are there is lack of historical production data and cost data say at the Kittila, even the Meadowbank, and the Pinos Altos and the three Abitibi mines were starting to get some historical cost data and performance data. So it’s a lot easier to calculate those cut-off rates. So there is a bit of a question mark on the other deposits and we feel as Sean mentioned we can do better and we expect going forward to be able to lower some of those operating cost and to be able to perhaps lower the cut-up rates but in the interim we are tending towards a more conservative position.

Your next question comes from Greg Barnes with TD Newcrest.

I was wondering where recoveries stand at Kittila now. I believe you're heading into a shutdown in March. And also what you plan to do during the shutdown?

Perhaps you can add a little bit more color to that of the shutdown

Yeah first of all on the recovery if we just look 2009, the first quarter we are 28, second quarter at 49 as of third quarter, first 28, 49, 64 and third and the fourth quarter at 76 in December, we did 78.6. So we're recovery is going on a good curve. Presently, we achieved some days and consecutively over a week and more than 1 time over 80% and 83%. Now we just want to have a more stable approach there and in the first quarter we will do some more tests to bring other kind of stabilizer inside of the other play. We cannot give anymore detail. This is a new [chemical] and that we have some results that we expect to the more stable operations. But at least we're able to do the demonstrations that we are able to achieve 80%, 83% gold revival.

Where is the chemical being added?

Sorry?

Where is the chemical being added?

We add it with the seed?

Add it with the seed? Okay.

Before its shutdown, it’s a long haul shutdown or we will have to go at least once per year in the other place and at the same time we will work on the oxygen pipe for the oxygen distribution. So in the normal inspection, it will be in March or if we can postpone, it will be in April.

I thought the shutdown was going to be a bigger maintenance shutdown to be replacing some components, pumps, pipes, things like that. But it doesn't sound like that.

We'll change some (inaudible) but we had everything and normally, that kind of shutdown it will be roughly a week.

Roughly a week? Okay. Just pushing gears to Dave, the tax rate at 2010 at 40% seems kind of high.

It'll probably be in the 35% to 40% range. It should crank down overtime as we get more income from Finland and Mexico which had lower statutory rates. And probably over the long-term 30% to 32%.

So when would that kick in? In 2011?

Probably 2012, 2013.

That's probably. Okay 30 to 32. Okay Thanks Dave.

Your next question is a follow up from John Flanagan of Fundamental Equity. Please go ahead.

Sean I wonder now that you've seen the light at the end of the various tunnels, whether it is time to crank up the dividend somewhat. What's your attitude on that??

Well, we paid one for 28 consecutive years which during 10 years has not been easy. So, we are certainly pretty exposed to a dividend. We set consistently during the building phase once we came through the building phase that we would look at increasing that dividend. So the next time that we would considering that would in December as we put together our revised mind plan which we hope will incorporate additional expansion opportunities in growth and throughput. So, we are certainly in a good position to be able to do that and given our track record of paying one for 28 years it shows that its something that we pay attention to and would look to increase at some point.

Your next question is from Anita Soni of Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Could I get you Dave, to elaborate again on the inventory adjustment? I'm just having a little bit of trouble reconciling my cash costs for LaRonde.

Yeah, I mean we sold 5,000 ounces or we produce 5,000 more ounces of gold and sold. We produced about 2,000 tons were sold more zinc than we sold and we produced I guess about a 100,000 ounces more silver than we sold and those aggregate when you acquire the price expansion for those due to an inventory adjustment in order to reconcile from your cost of sales on the income statement due production cost per ounce.

And you guys quote production cost of sales in terms of production rate?

Our cost per ounce are on the production basis, whereas our realized prices are on a sold basis. Perhaps we do have to do reconciliation from the income statement under SEC rules.

And I don't know if you can let us know but what are the TCRCs running right now at?

For 2010 its not zinc expectation on the market I will see 270 within we expect would have been 275, the base at 2514, that’s 7 minus 4 and for the copper I would say a little bit lower than 50 and 5% or 48-47.

Could you say what the zinc once again?

275 days, 2500.

(Operator Instructions) Mr. Boyd there are no further questions at this time, please continue

Thank Operator and thank you very much everyone if there is any other questions offline; please feel free to give us a shout. Thanks once again

Ladies and gentlemen this concludes the conference call for today, thank you for your participation. And you may now disconnect your line.