Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Barrick Gold Q2 2011 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded, Thursday, July 28, 2011. I would now like to turn the conference over to Deni Nicoski, Vice President of Investor Relations. You may go ahead, sir.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Before we begin, I will bring to your attention the fact that we will be making forward-looking statements during the course of this presentation. For a complete discussion of the risks, uncertainties and factors which may lead to our actual financial results and performance being different from the estimates contained in our forward-looking statement, please refer to our year-end report or our most recent AIF filing. With that, I'll hand it over to Aaron Regent, President and CEO of Barrick.

Thanks, Deni, and good morning. And thank you for joining our second quarter conference call. I'm joined here today by Jamie Sokalsky, Peter Kinver, Kelvin Dushnisky and Rob Krcmarov, and there are also other members of our senior management team on hand as well who will be available to answer questions later on in the call. I'll start by covering some of the highlights of the quarter and provide an update on our projects. And I'll turn the call over to Rob Krcmarov, our Senior Vice President of Global Exploration, to discuss the exploration upside at the recently acquired Lumwana and Jabal Sayid assets. And then Jamie will take you through our results in a bit more detail and our outlook on the gold and copper market, after which we'd be happy to take any questions that you might have. Turning to the quarter. Operationally and financially, we had a solid quarter but the increased pressure on the capital costs for projects has been a challenge. Metal prices continue to increase underpinned by strong price support of fundamentals. Operationally, we met our production and cost targets. Second quarter gold production was 1.98 million ounces at a cash cost of $445 per ounce. And we remain on track to meet our guidance this year. With the increase in metal prices and good cost control, our margins continue to expand and led to record adjusted net earnings of $1.1 billion or $1.12 per share, which is above consensus estimates. This also equates to annualized 21% return on equity. We completed the Equinox acquisition and associated long-term financing. The newly acquired assets will add another source of long-term cash flow to the company. The one area where we continue to be challenged is the pressure on the capital cost of our projects. I'll…

Thanks, Aaron. The Australia Pacific regional business unit has taken on a new focus on exploration drilling in an effort to expand the resource and to determine the optimal size of the expansion, which could potentially double processing rates at Lumwana. I think there's excellent potential for both brownfields and greenfields resource growth, and we feel confident we can materially increase resources, throughput and production here. Let me just briefly comment on the overall exploration potential at Lumwana. The orebodies in this region are typically very large, continuous and naturally extensive. They're kilometric in scale and have excellent grade continuity, as well as sharp visual boundaries and are extremely predictable. Historically, there's been a high ratio of resource conversion and upgrading, the ore is coarse-grained and metallurgically simple to extract. Essentially, this is a simple straightforward operation. I think Equinox has done a fantastic job in developing Lumwana. But the vast majority of exploration focused on infill drilling, resource upgrading and condemnation drilling for infrastructure only. There's been no material drilling on this -- on property target outside of the resource area for around 15 years. A minimum is 16 drill rigs are planned to be added, primarily at the development stage Chimiwungo deposit to convert mineralized inventory and inferred resources to the measured and indicated category, to conduct extensional drilling, infill drill 2 potential starter pits and evaluate the potential for a third starter pit. Malundwe is open to the north and south, and Chimiwungo remains open in multiple directions. In addition, recent condemnation drilling west of the current optimized Chimiwungo pit shell is intersecting typical, what we call Chimi-style mineralization. Additionally, widely spaced drilling is planned for the recent Mutoma discovery, as well as drilling to test advanced sediment-hosted copper-gold targets elsewhere on the Lumwana Mining Lease and…

Thanks, Rob. I'll go over our strong financial results in the quarter. The second quarter average realized gold price was a new record at $1,513 per ounce, up from the $1,205 per ounce in the second quarter of 2010. The trend of gold margin expansion continued during the quarter, which was driven by the higher gold prices but also continued cost control. Cash margins and net cash margins increased 33% and 30% to $1,068 per ounce and $1,175 per ounce, respectively, reflecting the exceptional leverage the company has to the gold prices. And as you know, the price is about $100 higher than the realized price in the second quarter today. Our reported net earnings for the second quarter rose 35% to $1.2 billion, $1.16 per share from $859 million or $0.87 per share in the prior year period. Our quarter 2 adjusted net earnings increased 36% to a record $1.1 billion or $1.12 per share from $824 million or $0.84 per share in Q2 2010, which reflects the higher realized gold and copper prices and higher gold sales volumes. Our quarter 2 EBITDA increased 40% to $2.1 billion from $1.5 billion in the same year period. Our quarter 2 operating cash flow of $690 million and adjusted operating cash flow of $938 million, which adjust for the onetime operating cash flow impacts related to the Equinox acquisition, compares to operating cash flow of $1,100 -- $1.1 billion and adjusted operating cash flow of $1.1 billion -- million -- $1.1 billion in the same prior year period, respectively. However, there are some unusual items in the quarter which I'd like to take a moment to highlight, which impacted our cash flow in the quarter. Operating cash flow and adjusted operating cash flow were negatively impacted by an increase in income…

Thanks, Jamie. So in closing, we continue to be very optimistic about the future of our industry and for Barrick. As Jamie highlighted, gold and copper prices are well supported with significant upside potential underpinned by excellent price support of fundamentals. We have been and will continue to be a major beneficiary of increasing metal prices with a large production base that we have in both large gold production base and a stable cost operating structure. And this has been reflected in our expanding margins, record financial results and higher returns on equity. We have 2 world-class projects that are nearing production within the next few years and are anticipated to generate combined annual EBITDA of around $2.8 billion at today's prices. And the impact of these 2 mines will lower our overall unit cost by about 20%. The acquisition of Equinox adds 2 quality copper mines to our portfolio. And in particular, the long-life Lumwana mine, which will provide us with an additional source of long-term cash flow. And we continue to advance our deep pipeline of world-class projects, which offer us further investment options in the future. So in conclusion, we feel the Barrick story is a compelling one and the outlook to be very positive. So with that, we'll conclude our formal remarks. And operator, at this point, we'd be happy to take any questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from the line of Patrick Chidley from HSBC.

I just wanted to ask really your view on obviously on acquisitions going forward in this environment where it appears as if you were stalked as well as a whole bunch of other companies in a sector of trade downs and pretty low multiples. And I'm wondering if it might be better to be moving towards acquisitions -- cash acquisitions rather than actually building your own projects, which by all accounts, seems like the CapEx is going up so rapidly that it's -- aligns with what you're seeing in the market for existing assets.

Right. Well, I think that from a strategic perspective, we think it's important in terms of from a long-term perspective of having a balanced approach of looking at both acquisitions as well as developing projects. And so we are -- we'll continue to monitor the marketplace for opportunities to acquire assets. And clearly, there's a real attraction to buying and producing assets because of the benefit of getting production immediately and the earnings and cash flow that comes from it. But typically, producing assets tend to be higher valued because they're -- perhaps have been de-risked. And so that adds a bit of a challenge. On the development side, capital costs are up and that's a trend in the industry. And now clearly, the watermarks you're seeing that we're being impacted by that. But the leverage to higher metal price is quite substantial. And so despite the fact that capital costs are up, as we take Pascua-Lama as an example, on today's prices, we would generate $1.9 billion of EBITDA for that asset, which is on an investment to EBITDA ratios around 2.6x. So if you think we trade at 6x multiple, once that's in production, you can see the impact it can have on the overall valuation of the company. So projects are hard but -- and there's higher risk associated with it, but I think that your returns are higher, the projects signed [ph] and you somewhat get paid for taking that risk. And provided you got the right orebody, you can create a lot of value. So I think they said, it's kind of a balanced approach between the 2.

Just a quick follow-up, if I may, on new projects going forward. I mean you talked about Turquoise Ridge, a little bit about how that open pit plan is potentially going to be a big asset for Barrick in the future. I think it was a 20 million ounce figure there. I'm wondering if there are other areas of the portfolio, other open pits across the world that you've got that you might be thinking similar things there in terms of bigger expansions and potentially, big additions to the asset base?

I think Turquoise Ridge is a kind of unique situation given the low grade mineralization around the existing mine. So we don't really see the same scope of opportunity across the portfolio. Although what we do see is around some of our existing mines. There are satellite pits, which may not be the highest grade but the capital intensity to develop them is quite low so your returns on capital can be quite high. So we do have an active program to look at developing those types of opportunities. In addition, some of our other mines like Lagunas Norte, we have the salt mine project where there could be 3 million to 5 million ounces of gold there, which are not currently in our plans, which we'll be looking to pursue. There's I guess a new metallurgical process we'll apply to attract those ounces. So I think given the higher gold price, projects like that become much more attractive. And then I guess the other point is from an exploration perspective. We have a pretty good pipeline of projects on the exploration front, and I think that there are going to be some I think attractive opportunities that's going to come out of that. On that front, we'll look to update you going forward.

Our next question is from the line of Greg Barnes with TD Securities.

Aaron, I get the inflation aspect to the CapEx increases and the productivity changes. But I'm a little surprised by the requirements for additional material like steel and cement to Pascua-Lama given the stage that project is already at. I was wondering what happened to cause that.

Well, I think, I'll make a comment then maybe I'll ask Peter to comment as well. I think that the earlier estimates were just -- were light. When you look at the benchmarking of quantities that are required to a generic project, the assumptions that were used for this project were consistent and in line with that. But I think that when you look at the location of Pascua-Lama, particularly the winter conditions where there's significant winds, snow, as an example, structural steel. As a consequence, a lot more structural steel is required to fortify the facility housing, the processing plant. And I think that's an example where when you look at previous estimates, they looked reasonable. But then when you have to incorporate the environment that Pascua is located, that additional quantities in fact were necessary to refortify the facility. And so that's an example of something that has added to the quantities. I don't know, Peter, if you want to...

When we actually started excavating foundations, et cetera, we found the footings required either different material or deeper material, and that kind of impacted the quantities of concrete and steel. But one of the big factors that Aaron said was the wind conditions up there are quite extreme and we've had to sort of beef up the main buildings.

And just as a follow-up then on Cerro Casale. You said you would consider a production decision once the EIS is approved. That seems a little less definitive than perhaps in the past, are you reconsidering the project?

No, I think it's still a good project. But I think in the environment we're in right now, we think that the best approach is to get all the permitting finished, do the detailed engineering and then you'll re-cost the project at that point and you'll have much greater certainty in terms of things that you just mentioned, quantities as well as pricing. You have the opportunity to do turnkey contracts. So that's sort of what I was implying by our comment. So there's really 3 paths that we're pursuing. Submitting the EIA and get the permitting done. In parallel, complete the detailed engineering. And then the third path is fully exploring the Casale property. As we highlighted, there's a satellite deposit that looks -- deposit probably early stage. But there's been sulfur showing, which looks really encouraging. And so we're advancing an exploration campaign now and we'll be drilling by the end of the summer -- our summer. And hopefully over the next 6 months, we'll re-flush out what that might be and that could have a positive impact on the project. So that's kind of theplan. And so as we get towards -- that will probably take us about 18 months or so. So really towards the end of next year, we'll be in a position to make a decision on constructing the project.

So if you haven't done detailed engineering, is there further scope for CapEx to go even higher at Cerro Casale?

I can't say that the numbers won't go up. But I like to think that we have already built in a fair -- fairly high contingency. In the $6 billion number, there's a $900 million contingency, which represents about -- I think it's about 18% of the capital of the project. So I think that we have taken a fairly perhaps cautious view on that. So I think the numbers should be good but until you've done all the work, I can't say definitively.

Our next question from the line of David Haughton from BMO Capital Markets.

I've got some questions and obviously the focus here is on CapEx. But you spoke about the numbers going up, what about the timeline for delivery? Are you seeing any issues with regard to the timeline being blown out, available of [ph] fleet equipment tires, et cetera, is that coming through at the moment?

Well, from a schedule perspective, we're continuing to target the middle of 2013. And part of the capital increase relates to maintaining schedule, probably around $200 million or so. And that relates to having -- building out the camp, additional catering cost, operating in the wintertime, some bonus schemes. So that -- so we are deliberately spending some capital to keep schedule. And the payback is pretty high. The EBITDA is around $500 million in a quarter and so it's a quick payback on the capital that would be spent to maintain schedule. Peter?

Yes, I'm going to add. At Pueblo Viejo the extra mobile equipment is on site. So that's secure and we've secured positions for mobile equipment at Pascua-Lama. So that side of the risk is being mitigated. But we are seeing -- I mean, to concur what you're saying, we are seeing increased delivery times for major equipment.

All right. Somewhere in your release I'd seen 40 weeks as a potential for a mill to be delivered. That surprised me. It seemed a little bit lower than what I'd heard from others. So it sounds like you do have some leverage over some of your competitors in that regard.

Yes, I think the size counts a bit. I think we've seen certainly in Lumwana, for example. Suppliers, because we're a big customer, they probably push us to the front of the queue, I suppose.

Just now thinking about the individual projects. At PV, you had mentioned that there's additional CapEx for the power. Is that included in the $3.6 billion to $3.8 billion or is that in addition to the CapEx that you'd previously indicated?

It's not included in the $3.6 billion to $3.8 billion. We have a -- in the $3.6 billion to $3.8 billion, there is dollars which have been allocated to ensure that power is available to the plant. And so we can operate, but what we're looking at though is the quality of that power is probably not ideal, both from a cost perspective and reliability perspective. And so we always contemplate the project to have an alternative longer term and different power solution. And so we're kind of front [ph] into that. And what it'll do is it will provide again greater stability to the power supply. It'll be lower cost and it gives us the potential in the future to switch from HFO to LNG, and that will have a meaningful impact on our operating cost. So there will be a return on the capital that we invested on the power side. But the additional $300 million is separate from the $3.6 billion to $3.8 billion.

Do you have a sense as to what magnitude that cost saving could be? Are we talking 5%, 10% sort of thing or do you have a figure?

That's probably -- yes, that's probably a good estimate at this point.

And as far as the towers go, you're awaiting some new permitting there for the remedial action that you needed. Is that going to impact that timeline that you've indicated for the start-up mid next year? Or should we allow some more timing just in case that permit just gets jagged [ph] up anyway?

We don't anticipate having any issues. But I don't know, Kelvin maybe -- I'll ask Kelvin because he's basically focused on this quite closely.

Sure. Well, the timeline actually builds the new permitting into mid next year production. And the response so far, we've been working very closely with government. They've been very proactive and so we've -- things are moving well on track. So at this point, we don't anticipate any delay.

All right. Now switching back to Pascua. You had mentioned a very high contingency number, quite a range as well 350 to 650. Is that to cover additional costs or do you have some change of scope in mind if it's to move the upper end? What's the thinking behind such big contingency range?

There's no contemplated change in scope. That's already been factored into the numbers. I think that perhaps there's a bit of a cautionary conservatism that we're layering in right now. Because as you point out, it is a healthy contingency. But the environment that we're operating right now is a dynamic environment, so we just think it's prudent to be a bit cautious.

All right. Switching now to Cerro Casale. You alluded to some design improvements that you've been working on. What can we expect to see out of that? Is that with regard to better metallurgical recovery or is there something else that we could expect?

I don't think you should expect to see anything too visible. It really is reflecting the fact that the ore at Cerro Casale is quite hard. And so we sort of looked at other like projects that had similar hardness to the ore. And so we've added additional grinding capacity to ensure that we'll get the recoveries that we anticipated. Peter?

The big thing is the energy costs as well.

Right.

And the CapEx that you've got, do you have any provision in there for leveraging off the existing base that you've got within the region? With Pascua as a potential base or anything like that?

We will have for certain synergies. Obviously, where we have overlap, there will be some synergies built in.

But from a dollar perspective, they would be -- that significance is more from a utilization of people, yes.

All right. And then the final one, I'm sorry for taking so much of your time, Jabal Sayid. What's the status of the permits and the ordering of the equipment and how confident should we feel about the start up time that you've mentioned of next year?

Let me start with the equipment. Basically, everything's being ordered around the water. One of the critical points now is try and get the major equipment in before the early Ramadan period. And we're looking at second half of next year for first production on the permitting side.

Permits are all in hand for construction. Once you proceed to that, then you get the operating permit.

And the CapEx number there, you've had an opportunity to review from what Equinox had and given the circumstances that you've got at other mines, you're comfortable with the CapEx number of $400 million?

I think so, yes.

Our next question from the line of Anita Soni from Credit Suisse. Anita Soni - Crédit Suisse AG: My question refers to the capital cost -- sorry the cash cost estimates. The net cash cost, are you deducting copper from Lumwana from the gold production? Or is that just including the byproducts from Pueblo Viejo and mixing them into the gold?

Anita, it's Jamie. The net cash cost is a metric that we've added in addition to our normal cash cost reporting to provide an indication of what all of the copper revenue that's generated by the company. What that does to our overall cash cost to try to compare, on an apples-to-apples basis, ourselves with many of the other companies who are utilizing much more of the copper byproducts. So that net cash cost number will include all of the copper production from Zaldívar and Lumwana. And so that number will go down even further as we are adding more of the Lumwana copper production going forward. But it's just that, it's really a secondary type of metric to our overall cash cost reporting. But I think it does give a better idea of how we stack up to some of our peer group. Anita Soni - Crédit Suisse AG: Okay. And then just with respect to Cerro Casale. I think the original start-up or the latest start-up timeline had been middle of 2015 or early 2016. Is that still what you envision or has it been pushed out a little bit?

I suspect that, that timeline will be pushed out. Anita Soni - Crédit Suisse AG: Okay. And then just lastly with the copper callers, just so I understand that. In 2011, you've got 40% that is hedged on the downside, at -- was it 327 and then 55% that's hedged on the upside of 485, is that how it works?

Yes, that's right. So 55% of the production if it goes to 485, that's what we'll get. And the other 45% that's on hedge is completely exposed to the prices higher than the 485.

Our next question from the line of Kerry Smith from Haywood Securities.

Kelvin, just on the new tailings facility at Pueblo Viejo. Does it need to be re-permitted because you need to now have a larger footprint to handle higher potential volumes of runoff because of what you've seen with this big rain? Or exactly why do you have to re-permit it?

Well, Kerry, 2 things. First of all, good news. The copper dam start-up has already been approved. So it took them to only one week to do that review. But given that there was the failure to the start-up given the unusual rainfall and the sequencing of that, the government's asked for a review just to make sure that the original design is still consistent with the overall design. So no real change, the intent is that the starter dam is scheduled for approval October 1. The government review panel that was in place to review the original design, you might recall this being approved in sequences as we moved up. And so that process is still in place, and the intent is to begin depositions in May. So as far as that goes, we're still on track. No major shift.

You should note, too, that the tailings end design is designed to withstand a rain event like we just experienced. It just so happened that the dam was at a stage where there wasn't sufficient storage capacity behind it. But as the damage raise, these storage capacity rises exponentially as you have more surface area.

So overall capacity, there's no change.

All right. So are you actually re-permitting the design or they've just asked for some additional work to be done to make sure the design is still appropriate and if they're happy with that, then you keep the old permit? Or I'm just confused. Are you actually re-permitting it, though?

No. Kerry, the former. This a revalidation of the original design and so the government just wants to ensure. And in the Dominican they have an expert panel who's been advising the government, we've been working with them to do the original approval and again as we're going through this next stage, so no fundamental change.

Okay. And Aaron, previously you sort of suggested that production for 2011 would be back half weighted. Is that still the case?

I don't know if we suggested that. I think -- I don't think we suggested that. I think our budgets could say that our guidance for the year is between $7.6 million and $8 million and we're basically on track to meet that.

Okay. And then perhaps, Peter, what are the plant availability and dilution issues at Lumwana? Because the plant is new, and I wasn't aware that they were having a dilution issue. But you talked about in the release, just curious exactly what the problems are there.

Further availability actually is pretty good. And I think we have to commend Equinox, they did a very good job of building the mine. And the plant has been well engineered, and is in good shape. On the operational issues, there's an acceptance and awareness. There is currently high dilution and we've got a team of people helping them get through that. One of the issues is the orebody dips at about 26 degrees, which is a kind of awkward angle. You to address off the waste off the face before you start loading. So we've introduced them to dress the waste off. So we're going to get the dilution down from probably 30% to about 20% by the end of the year and the next year we're going to target 12% dilution.

So it has been 30%, you're hoping to get to 20% by some time this year and then 12% ultimately?

Yes.

And part of the drilling program is to do additional infill drilling, which will I think help dramatically in mine planning. I think mine planning is an area that we've noticed has been somewhat -- where there's improvement to be made from a mine planning perspective.

Okay. And just in terms of the CapEx reviews that you've now completed for Pueblo Viejo, Pascua-Lama and Casale. Who actually did those reviews for you? I'm presuming it was an internal group and then now you're getting this consultant to review those numbers, is that correct?

Yes, that's correct. We had -- so we have 2 different teams. Clearly, the Pascua project team that we've had some changes there. So that's a bit of a fresh perspective that was brought. In addition, there's a separate team on Cerro Casale. But we did have 2 firms come in to review both of those estimates, Turner and Thompson, Pascua-Lama and IPA Cerro Casale. So we did have 2 independent parties, engineering firms who are experienced to review projects come in review our methodology and our assumptions. So it's just another layer of scrutiny.

And sorry, who was the group that reviewed Pascua-Lama?

Turner and Thompson.

Our next question is from the line of Steve Butler from Canaccord.

So a question for you on Pascua-Lama. I see, Aaron, you raised your guidance for the first 5 years by about 50,000 ounces. Is that simply the gold grade in the first 5 years? I see silvers been maintained at 35 million ounces a year.

I think that's the main reason, yes.

Mainly gold, not throughput change. Peter, productivity you referred to -- productivity levels at Pascua-Lama being obviously lower-than-expected productivity levels. But the productivity have worsened over the years comparing it to Veladero because of the labor issue, inexperienced labor, or is it particularly just harsher elevation issues?

I think it's a combination of recruiting new people. The altitude difference does make a difference. If you walk around up there, you can definitely feel it's harsher on the body and it's a lot colder. We just come out of a winter. We're coming out of a winter where we originally planned not to do a lot of work during the winter. But we have managed to keep some work going, but it does impact productivity. But we did see this at Veladero when we started. It kind of takes 1 year or 2 to get the productivity. I can remember in the early days of Veladero, we had some times but within 1 year or 2 we have the productivity levels up to much better levels.

Great. Cortez had a great Q2 guys. Is it sustainable over the balance of the year roughly at those levels or will we see any changes?

Due to stockpiling in grade, et cetera, we expect to come down from the 400,000 ounces to about the 300,000 to 325,000 ounce level. And the cash cost will probably creep up closer to $300 per ounce level.

Okay. And lastly, Aaron, I mean with CapEx reasonably crystallized at Cerro Casale as best as you can guess at $6 billion. And if you didn't have -- and if you had permits today, would you make an investment decision in the positive today for the project? Maybe it's in light of your review of the long-term copper and gold price perhaps.

Sure. I think Casale is a good project. It's -- like all these things, it won't be easy. And so I think it's something that we've looked clearly very closely at and I think the bias will be to try to advance it. So yes.

Our next question is from the line of Barry Cooper from CIBC.

Just wanted to ask Peter the 4 autoclaves that you've got at Pueblo Viejo, just trying to kind of assess. Does having 4 autoclaves heighten or reduce the risk? And then wondering is the devil usually more in the ore or in the individual autoclave when these things have troubles, primarily during the start-up phase?

Well, having 4 obviously leads itself to flexibility because occasionally you have to re-brick these. So if you had one gigantic autoclave, you would obviously not get the availability. But autoclaves basically see sulfur grades and that's basically what they see. And the throughput of an autoclave is really determined by the sulfur going in and the sulfur going out. So as we commission, hopefully we don't get any surprises. We've -- in the last 12 months, we've been bringing people from Dominican Republic to Goldstrike and vice versa. So the Goldstrike guys who are very experienced on site. So we don't anticipate any major hiccups.

Right. And then Jamie, I think usually you give us some sort of an indication of your forward OpEx position in Australian dollars. And this quarter, you've just said substantial. I'm wondering if you can kind of elaborate a little bit more on substantial and then how do you allocate that hedging to the capital expenditures versus the operating cost expenditures.

Okay, Barry. Actually on Page 18 in the MD&A, we've got a table there. And if we look at post 2011, we're averaging probably about 75% to 80% on average. Next year, we've got about 85% hedged. Following year after that, 70%, and then at about 50% in 2014. So about 75% of the overall operating and capital exposure is hedged post 2011 at rates that are below $0.75 on average. The bulk of that is operating costs. The capital that we hedge is sustaining capital there, which isn't a huge amount. We've got about $1 billion or so of operating cash cost and a fraction of that is in the sustaining capital. So the high percentage of these hedges relate to the operating costs.

Our final question is from the line of John Tumazos from John Tumazos Independent Research

A long time ago, watch group is in the queue at the geological survey of Saudi Arabia, mid-80s. And various geologists that I've spoken to had great enthusiasm for gold exploration in Saudi Arabia. Alcoa has over 100-kilometer long pretty continuous box-like deposit, a very high quality, where their biggest capital is in Saudi Arabia. In addition to Citadel and Equinox's activities, what are your thoughts about the big picture grassroots opportunity in the kingdom over and above the specific copper-gold deposit engineered? And with the 20% tax rate, it seems like we should be talking about gold.

All right. Well, maybe I'll make a comment just touching on your last point and then I'll ask Rob to maybe comment on the potential -- exploration potential. And one of the positive things about Saudi Arabia is that it does have a fairly healthy industrial base, obviously, driven after petrochemical industry but you've mentioned Alcoa as well. And so there's a level of sophistication in the country, which is perhaps much more robust compared to some of the countries that we operate in. So that's a real positive. From a policy perspective, the government is trying to encourage diversification of their economy and resources outside of petrochemicals is a focus for them. And I think that's kind of reflected in the attractive tax rate. So those are a number of positives. But Rob, perhaps you could comment on the exploration potential of both Jabal Sayid as well as the land positions that we have.

Sure, Aaron. I guess the Arabian shield is known to have more than [ph] copper and gold mines and more than 6,000 mineral occurrences. And I think the spot that has been very lightly explored using both exploration and data integration techniques. Also, if you have a look at the granted tenement position in Saudi Arabia, there is a lot of unstaked ground and a lot of mineral countries. So on that basis, I think there is definitely a potential to fund additional mineral occurrences and test some of the known ones.

We have no further questions at this time. Sir, you may resume with your closing remarks.

Okay. Well, thank you, operator. And again, I'd like to thank everybody for joining our good call. There's a lot to cover off and we appreciate your patience. And I guess we look forward to speaking with you at our -- I hope that you can join us for our Investor Day, which is on September 7. That will give everyone an opportunity to talk again in more depth about various aspects of the company. So with that, we'll conclude the call and hope everyone has a great summer. All the best.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude the conference call for today. We thank you all for your participation and kindly ask that you please disconnect your lines. Have a great day, everyone.