Good morning, everybody and welcome to the presentation of our results for the three months to June 30. As is customary, safety is our first value. In the unlikely event of an emergency, sirens will sound. Please move to the nearest exits, which are behind me and to my right. If you can assemble in the car park directly behind the building and safety wardens will take care of you from there. A quick look at our Safe Harbor statement, certain statements contained in this document other than statements of historical fact including without limitation, those concerning the economic outlook for the gold mining industry, expectations regarding gold price, production, cash costs, all-in sustaining costs, cost savings and other operating results, return on equity, productivity improvements and growth prospects and outlook of AngloGold Ashanti’s operations individually or in the aggregate, including achievement of project milestones, commencement and completion of commercial operations of certain of our exploration and production projects, and the completion of acquisitions and dispositions, AngloGold Ashanti’s liquidity and capital resources and capital expenditures and the outcome and consequences of any potential and pending litigation or regulatory proceedings or environmental health and safety issues are forward-looking statements regarding our operations, economic performance and financial condition. Although AngloGold Ashanti believes that expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements and forecasts are reasonable, no assurance can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Accordingly, results could differ materially from those set out in the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, changes in economic, social, and political and market conditions, success of business and operating initiatives, changes in the regulatory environment and other government actions, including environmental approvals, fluctuations in gold prices and exchange rates, the outcome of pending or future litigation proceedings and business and…

Thank you, Stewart. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. If we can kick off with the slide which recaps on our strategy. If you remember, we put this out during the early part of last year and we have been steadily implementing the strategy. There are five building blocks to the strategy, one around foundation, which is ensuring that we have got – continued to improve our safety record, have good and capable people in right roles, and improve our sustainability and our social license to operate. The second pillar is ensuring proactively that we have got the financial flexibility we need to implement the strategy. The third is around optimizing all forms of costs whether it’s direct costs, overheads and exploration expenditure, and capital expenditure. The fourth leg of the pillar is improving the quality of the portfolio by bringing on stream new mines and making the assets work harder. And the final pillar obviously is always reminding ourselves that mining is a long-term game and therefore not to take simple short-term issues, but keeping our long-term optionality alive. The end result is a solid business with strong foundation and fundamentals, a team that is focused on delivery and commitment, ensuring sustainability of our cash flows from a diversified quality portfolio. If I can kick off with safety, it’s an area which we spend quite a lot of time in our presentations. You will recall it’s an area where we have worked hard over many years to try and improve as we get to zero harm. Our approach has had four parts to it, relentless and steadfast leadership commitment, whether you take it from the Board level going all the way down to the rock face. In addition to that, improving our systems, processes and procedures and bringing about a…

I will come back to safety on the next slide, but let me first deal with production and costs for the South African region. The South African underground operations improved markedly over the first quarter in terms of the production output that was some 26% higher in volume than they were in Q1. This is to be expected given the amount of shifts we are able to work in Q1 versus Q2. So the product improvement – productivity improvement there was fairly significant. We also had lower than Q1 safety stoppages which helped the production. We did have a grade decrease. The production levels offset this. And our gold production from underground was 15% higher than the previous quarter. Turning to Moab Khotsong, Moab Khotsong’s grade declined slightly during the quarter. And as we have said over a number of quarters, we will fluctuate within this range some 5% to 10% higher and then coming off the same amount. But we should remain within this range for a number of quarters going forward. The big work at Moab remains the integration between the Moab Khotsong mine and the Great Noligwa mine primarily in order to ensure that the Great Noligwa mine remains profitable. And next quarter, I will give a little bit more detail on how that work is progressing. Suffice to say that all of the employees at Great Noligwa are now going underground by the Moab Khotsong infrastructure. Turning to mine waste solutions, mining grade and recovery remain our key challenges at that operation. However, the uranium circuit is now being reconfigured. If you remember, we did commissioned uranium circuit. We then had an element of preg-robbing occurring because of the chemicals we were using in the uranium circuit, we have now reconfigured that uranium circuit and we…

Thank you, Mike and good morning. I would like to take you through the quarter two operating results for Continental Africa, Australia and the Americas region. But before I comment on them, I guess I would like to make a statement around safety. It was previously covered by Venkat, but wanted to reemphasize the fatal-free quarter and the best quarter two performance on record for AGA. We must enjoy these metrics, but I would just want everybody to understand, we do understand the work that it takes to continue meeting and exceeding our targeted improvements in safety. Secondly, each quarter, I make comments around the cost rationalization work and ask you to continue to watch quarter-on-quarter the outputs. As I do each quarter, try to set a context of where we are at. This work was communicated in mid 2013 and had a target of removing $500 million from our operating cost. The timeframe we gave was an 18-month timeframe to remove these costs ending in December 2014. At the end of 2013, we had documented removal of a certain value and we defined the remaining value and put that into our operating plan. Currently, our comparisons to our expenditure plan, is 3% better than planned. So, with that said, our current business plans contain the $500 million reduction. And if we can continue on that path, as you will see by the comparison to second quarter 2013, we will have met our commitments. There is however one area that I think we should point out is that over the last year and a half, we have been able to contain by this work and this process, the inflationary increases. They are beginning to creep back into our operations, through labor, power, and fuel costs primarily. So, we continue to…

Thanks, Ron. This morning, I will provide an update on our projects and also on our greenfields exploration. Firstly, in regard to Kibali, solid progress continues to be made at Kibali. During quarter two, the prime focus has been on the completion and the commissioning of the plant sulfide circuit. The secondary crushing circuit, flotation circuit, regrind mill, and pump cells were completed and commissioning. And ramp-up commenced, resulting in gold production of 91,000 ounces on 100% basis. Nzoro hydropower station was completed and commissioned and is being integrated with the diesel power station at a pace that’s commensurate with the stabilization of the process plant. Development of the underground mine is going especially well. Lateral development of the first load level of the shaft is just being completed, and sinking has resumed. The depth of the shaft now is about approximately 520 meters, with a target depth of 760 meters. A notable milestone has been achieved with the development of the declines in the cross cuts into the top of the 5,000 load, and that’s the diagram included on the slide here. The ore body has been intercepted where expected and at the same tenor as expected. In regard to Cripple Creek, you will recall that Cripple Creek, the mine life extension project actually consists of two elements, the construction of a mill to treat higher grade and partially refractory ore that is within the ore body and the construction of a new valley leach facility. Mill construction remains on schedule for first gold at the end of this year and approximately 500,000 ton of ore has been mined in preparation for commissioning and ramp up. The valley leach facility construction remains on schedule for completion in mid-2016. Both the mill and the valley leach expansion are on budget…

Thank you, Graham. Our ongoing focus on costs across the business is evident in the 19% decrease in our all-in sustaining cost from $1,302 an ounce in quarter two last year to $1,060 an ounce in this second quarter, driven by lower operating, corporate and exploration costs and lower sustaining CapEx. All-in sustaining cost increased by 7% over quarter one. And quarter one we were at $993 an ounce. I had indicated in our last quarter release that we expected our all-in sustaining cost to increase to between $1,100 and $1,145 an ounce as a result of stronger local currencies and increased operating costs relating to power increases, winter tariffs and higher fuel costs, together with adverse ore inventory and consumable store movements. I would also flag some timing differences or some timing around our stay-in business capital and indicated that we would see stay-in business spillover from Q1 into the remainder of the year. Lower than anticipated movements in our inventory services and stay-in-business spend coupled with a benefit of higher production enabled us to deliver a lower Q2 all-in sustaining cost than we had guided at the end of quarter one. The 29% year-on-year reduction in all-in cost from $1,679 an ounce to $1,192 an ounce this quarter reflects the all-in sustaining cost improvement and also the reduced project capital following the completion of Tropicana and the first phase of Kibali. Turning to earnings, there were a number of abnormal transactions that impacted on our earnings during this quarter. In order to provide a better understanding of our underlying earnings performance for the quarter, we have normalized our adjusted headline earnings. The major adjustments made in moving from the negative $4 million Q2 adjusted headline earnings to our normalized adjusted headline earnings of $76 million related to operational…

Just in terms of conclusion, wrapping up on a few slides, without compromising safety, we have pulled together six quarters of consistent good delivery as a management team. Over the past six quarters, we have shown safety improvements. We have shown production growth, not just from the two new mines coming on stream, but even from our existing assets. We have shown cost decline in a number of areas and importantly, the turnaround in the cash burn rate to more a modest amount of cash generation. Having said all of that, whilst recognizing that as a team and as every one of our 60,000 employees have done a wonderful job in helping us get through these six quarters, headwinds continue to remain formidable in a business like ours with 20 operations spread across the globe. So, there maybe events, which may cause us to miss a quarter here or there, but certainly the overall trend is heading in the right direction. Just recapping on some of the cost reductions, which we have achieved, it just gives you a looking back the scale of the reductions, which we have had to do. The cost saving efforts have been marked. This has been possible as a result of a focused exploration strategy to deliver best value, which has been implemented by Graham and the two operating teams led by Ron and Mike. On the corporate cost side, the restructuring, removing inefficiencies, eliminating duplication and keeping a lid on the indirect spend headed by both Italia and by Ria, have actually certainly paid off. And you can see that we have taken our corporate cost in particular back to levels that prevailed several years ago. In terms of our half year, if you recall, we did say that the first half of 2014…

Alright. If we can start with Johann, Citibank.

Thanks. Good morning, guys. Just quickly on Obuasi, three months ago, we sat here and I asked the same question, you basically say we are going to focus on the southern part of the mine. But how is production cost CapEx is going to look for the mine over the next 18 to 24 months?

Johann, the answer hasn’t changed as compared to what I gave you. It may not be the most helpful answer for you at the current stage. We did say we will actually update you in terms of our guidance when we announce our year end results for 2014 in February. At that stage, the team would be better informed in terms of what consents we have got and where we are taking the production going out in the future. But initial indications based on the approval of the plan, you have got to factor an element of quietening down of the mine with production coming in primarily from surface sources from just one particular surface source. But the numbers which you can safely put in is around $220 million for retrenchment costs for the full year as of the end of the last quarter that can be factored in and we did say as the production winds down, there is about $70 million to $80 million of working capital that needs to get paid up. But what you can see in the slide and unfortunately it might have missed everybody’s attention is the production has been improving at Obuasi in the last two quarters and the costs have been coming down. That has helped pull down the bleed rate and that always helps. But certainly, we won’t keep you waiting in patience beyond February of next year.

Thank you. Kane, UBS.

Hi. Good morning. Kane Slutzkin, UBS. Just Richard, on your net debt to EBITDA, what is sort of long-term target multiple? What are you sort of ideally comfortable with? And are you confident the sort of current measures you sort of got in place have been sort of reduced gearing levels?

So, I think if you look at our historical net debt and the net debt to EBITDA gearing levels, we have typically been below 1.5 times in terms of the net debt to EBITDA. So, I would say if we are looking at what is more comfortable, I think less than 1.5 times and from a net debt point of view, we would probably be looking more comfortable at $2 billion net debt rather than something close to $3 billion which is where we are currently.

Okay. So I mean, you are sort of getting some positive cash flow, but I mean that number has been pretty sticky. Just wondering what sort of measures outside of what you are doing now are you potentially looking at or will be looking at to sort of get that down, because it’s clearly been a headwind for you and you have just mentioned it now. So, yes, just interested to see how you think of that going forward?

So, I think the current measures will continue implementing and we are seeing benefit from the costs coming down. So, that will continue unabated and Ron continues to do his work with the team on that. Venkat has mentioned and it’s one of the key focuses in the strategy is to also continue to look at the portfolio. So, that will continue as well in terms of ensuring we have a portfolio that can generate sustainable free cash. I don’t know if you want to add to that?

I think in reality we have covered it and I don’t want to sort of keep going back to the same point. We continue to look at options in terms of how we can reduce the debt, but importantly, we are on a volatile gold price environment. So, what we want to have is adequate flexibility from a covenant point of view and a liquidity point of view was to do that. It just gives you time to look at all conceivable options.

Anyone else? Adrian, Standard Bank.

Good morning, gentlemen. Three questions if I may. Firstly, there was an article this morning in the Business Day concerning Goldfields they are non-compliant with 6093 of the MPRDA. Have you received anything similar from the DMR and does it pose a real risk to you? Second question around your corporate refinancing, you have opted for more flexible debt covenant ratio, is that going to be more expensive and then could you answer that in terms of interest charges in dollars per ounce? And then third question for Mike, you talked about Great Noligwa and now you are accessing it through Moab. Is that including ore tonnages and does that play say capacity constraint on Moab and what does that mean for PZ, Project Zaaiplaats if you were to go ahead with it? Thanks.

If I can pickup the first question, no, we haven’t received a letter. We can’t comment on Goldfields’ individual circumstances. We read the report the same time as you read it this morning. What we can comment though is that we have had certainly three audits by the department, one was as part of Moloto Solutions audit back in 2013 – at the end of ‘13. In addition to that, we had audits during May and also in August. And you would be able to pickup booklets out here, which shows what a stealthy commitment we have made, including our own self-assessment of the scorecards. In addition, as part of Mandela Day celebration, our Chairman went out to the production sites and the feedback we have had from the communities has been extremely positive. So we have not picked up any company negative nuisance. On the other hand, we have just had positive feedback come through from the communities in the ground and the department.

Then Adrian, on the looser covenant, the refinancing of the revolving credit facilities, that has actually come down in terms of cost, so we priced it more tightly than we had the previous facility. So that’s costing us less rather than more for slightly looser covenant. And your last question on interest costs, look we are paying around $250 million annually in interest cost, so call it $55 an ounce as a round number in terms of interest cost.

That cost coming down, is it just a function of the market?

Primarily a function of the market, so we were able to price more tightly as a result of that.

Adrian around the Great Noligwa and Moab Khotsong integration, do you remember that Moab was actually developed from Great Noligwa and it’s virtually one mine. So from an infrastructure point of view, it’s pretty easy to put the two mines together. The long-term plan which we will finish by the middle of next year is to have the rock and services coming out at Moab Khotsong as well and the barrels at Great Noligwa will really be able to go into care and maintenance, and obviously we will be able to remove a significant amount of cost. So the people are really going down at Moab Khotsong, by the middle of next year, we will have the rock coming out at Moab as well and be able to go into care and maintenance at Noligwa. The second part of the question is the effect in terms of capacity at Zaaiplaats. There is a number of ways you can access the Zaaiplaats ore body. At the previous presentations we have shown an option that accesses from Moab Khotsong, you can however access via Kopanang as well. We decided that we postponed the Zaaiplaats expansion we announced that I think, just over a year ago and we continue to look at options, which include the capacity constraints on whether and when we start the Zaaiplaats project. What’s complicating that is there is a nice resource developing directly below the Moab Khotsong ore body which we currently are drilling, which seems to have quite a lot of potential. We are just not sure of the scale or the depth. So, we need to consider whether it’s Zaaiplaats or whether we go deeper directly below Moab Khotsong. But I will firm up on that once we have done enough drilling to choose between the two projects.

Any numbers on the size of that resource potential?

No. it’s too early.

Thanks.

Anyone else?

Yeah. Sorry. Johann Steyn again, maybe Richard, what’s your next job going to be…?

You will have to watch this space.

Still within AngloGold?

I am going to take a little bit of time out to look at options. I am not rushing back into anything immediately.

Thanks.

Patrick Mann, Deutsche Bank.

Hi. Good morning. Just on the conversion of the plant to natural gas in Australia, is that funded by the provider and what sort of capital cost there in modifying the plant to run on 100% natural gas, if any?

If I can pick that up, broadly, the project involves a pipeline which steps off from the Murrin Murrin gas lateral and about 60 kilometers through the Sunrise Dam and then about another 220 after Tropicana. The project involves three elements. One is the pipeline of construction then through Australian pipeline association. And it involves no capital cost to AngloGold. And the capital costs and operating costs are paid through a transport fee during the – for the delivery of gas, so on a dollar per gigajoule basis for delivery to both Sunrise and Tropicana. The other element is the purchase of gas from the well head and that’s done on a gigajoule basis. And then the third element is the conversion of the existing power stations to gas. And that will be done through the IPP providers at each of the mines. So none of the conversion to gas involves any capital cost and it’s covered in operating cost. The net-net of that is about $25 to $30 an ounce for both of those mines. Importantly...

It would be in – sorry, go on Richard.

Importantly, converting to gas is a comparison to the current cost of power generation now. Converting to gas will be in Australian dollar terms to a proportion of CPI takes out any volatility in regard to diesel price movements or exchange rate movements on fuel for the long-term. It also removes about 50% of our trucking of fuel out to both of those operations.

There will be an impact on the balance sheet from an accounting point of view. Richard will elaborate on that.

Yes. So, just when that facility is handed over from an accounting treatment point of view, about $80 million will come through as capital in terms of the treatment. So, whenever that – so I think that’s in 2016 or – so just to flag an $80 million capital impact.

Is that non-cash?

Yes, effectively you gross up both sites and you amortize one and the debt comes down.

Great, thanks.

Similar to the lease of this building.