Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Barrick Gold Q3 2011 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would like to remind you, today's call is being recorded, Thursday, October 27, 2011. And now I have the pleasure to turn the call over to Mr. Deni Nicoski, Vice President, Investor Relation at Barrick Gold. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Before we begin, I'll 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 yearend 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 conference call today. I'm joined here today by Jamie Sokalsky, Peter Kinver, Kelvin Dushnisky and Rob Krcmarov. There are also other members of our senior management team on hand as well, who will be available to answer questions later on the call. I'll start by covering some of the highlights of the quarter and provide an update on our projects. I'll then turn the call over to Rob Krcmarov, our Senior Vice President of Global Exploration, to give you an update on the recently announced Red Hill and Gold Rush discoveries and other high-priority programs. Jamie will take you through our results in a bit more detail and our outlook on the gold market, after which we'd be happy to take any questions that you might have. Overall, we are pleased with the results in the quarter. Operationally, we met our production and cost targets. Quarter 3 gold production was 1.93 million ounces at total cash cost of $453 per ounce. EBITDA's on track to meet our original guidance for 2011. We reported a 45% increase in net earnings to a record $1.37 billion, or $1.37 per share. Adjusted net earnings were up 52% to $1.39 billion, or $1.39 per share. This equates to an annualized 25% return on equity, up from 21% in the second quarter. And our operating cash flow increased by 35% to a record $1.9 billion. Our cash margins continue to expand, reflecting our leverage to the gold price. Cash margins increased by 55% to nearly $1,300 per ounce, and net cash margins were up 51% to over $1,400 per ounce. Our projects in construction remain on track, with production at Pueblo Viejo and Pascua-Lama anticipated in mid-2012 and mid-2013, respectively. In September, we announced…

Thanks, Aaron. The 2011 exploration guidance is $370 million to $390 million and includes global exploration, what we call MinEx, or very near mine exploration; and African Barrick Gold exploration. We're on track to meet our targeted resource additions this year, and we're also setting up other projects for resource additions in future years. Exploration programs are underway in all regions. Red Hill, Gold Rush, Turquoise Ridge and Lumwana are key focus projects for us, which I'll be discussing in this presentation. The highlight of the exploration report this quarter was the announcement of the Red Hill and Gold Rush discoveries on September 7, which we followed up with a site visit to Cortez around 2 weeks later. Since we reported to you at our Investor Day, not only have we extended the strike length of Red Hill, but we intersected grades high enough to support underground mining, and the system still remains open in both directions. Drilling between the 2 deposits continues to intersect mineralization, and it's looking increasingly likely that the 2 deposits will emerge. We're now drilling south of Gold Rush to see how far that deposit extends to the south, so let's now have a look at some details. The drill results shown here on this slide since our Investor Day continue to increase our confidence in the size potential and also our confidence in the continuity of mineralization. At Red Hill, recent step-out holes have extended the zone, both to the north and to the south, and so the mineralization is still open in all directions, and the resource is expected to grow considerably beyond the current 3.5 million ounce inferred resource, which is shown in the red outline on this map. A step-out hole located 1,000 feet north of the current resource model intersected…

Thanks, Rob. As Aaron outlined earlier, our financial results for the quarter were very strong. The third quarter average realized gold price was a new record at $1,743 per ounce, which is $41 higher than the average spot price, and that's up over $500 above the third quarter of last year, or 41% from the $1,237 per ounce that we realized in the third quarter of 2010. So our trend of gold margin expansion continued during the quarter, driven both by higher gold prices but also continued cost control. Cash margins and net cash margins increased 55% and 51% to about $1,300 and $1,400 per ounce, respectively, reflecting the exceptional leverage the company has to the gold price. Our reported net earnings for the third quarter rose 45% to a record $1.37 billion, or $1.37% per share, from the $942 million, or 96% -- $0.96 per share in the prior year period. On an adjusted basis, our third quarter earnings increased 52% to $1.39 billion, or $1.39 per share, from the $912 million, or $0.93 per share, that we realized in the third quarter of 2010. And that reflected higher realized gold and copper prices and higher copper sales volumes. Our third quarter EBITDA was up 47% to $2.5 billion from the $1.7 billion in the same prior year period. I should mention that our third quarter average realized copper price was impacted by about $60 million in provisional pricing adjustments, due to the significant decrease in copper market prices at the end of September, and that reduced earnings by about $0.04 per share on an after-tax basis. The copper sales price, as with many other companies, is determined provisionally at the date of sale, with a final price determined at an agreed-upon future date, generally 1 to 4 months…

Thanks, Jamie. So in closing, we are pleased with the results of the quarter and believe that Barrick is very well positioned going forward. The fundamentals for our industry are quite positive. We have been and will continue to be a major beneficiary of improving prices, and it has been reflected in our expanded margins, record earnings and cash flow and returns in equity. We have a growing production base with a strong development and project pipeline. 2 of those projects: Pueblo Viejo, Pascua-Lama are going to be producing in the short term. Pueblo Viejo, less than year from now; and Pascua-Lama, less than 2 years from now. These 2 world-class projects are anticipated to generate combined annual EBITDA of around $2.6 billion at prices below where we are today and will have a significant impact and a positive impact on our overall cash cost. We continue to advance our deep pipeline of world-class projects, which offers us further investment options in the future. Our exploration commitment and strategy is yielding major results with new discoveries such as the ones at Red Hills and Gold Rush. And we have growing cash flows which, along with our positive outlook, supports our ability to return capital back to shareholders. So in conclusion, we feel that the Barrick story is a compelling one and an attractive investment for our shareholders. So that concludes our formal remarks. At this point, operator, we'd be happy to take any questions.

[Operator Instructions] And the first question coming from the line of John Bridges, JPMorgan. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: I was just wondering, the beat on the gold price, how did you get to that big number? It seems a little bit big for it just to be timing issues.

Sure. Well, Jamie, why don't you take them?

We manage the gold sales opportunistically. And as you saw in the quarter, there was a fair bit of volatility. So we look to time our gold sales opportunistically. We do transact in options, gold options, to generate premium and also position ourselves in the gold market. So that combination of managing the sales and the timing in the market is something that we did particularly well in the third quarter through a volatile market. And that's how we generated that additional realized price over the spot price. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: For a moment, I was afraid that you might be hedging.

No. But no, there's no -- hopefully, no.

Yes. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay, just a follow-up. On Zaldivar, the feasibility study on that is due soon, I believe. I wonder if there's any sort of update on that?

The Zaldivar sulfides? John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Yes, feasibility, yes.

The feasibility study...

Feasibility this year.

Yes, the pre-feasibility will be probably early -- will be next year, and then it'll take us some time to do the bankable feasibility study after that, which we anticipate probably 2000 -- what's the latest schedule, Ivan?

I'd say Q1 '13.

Yes, so 2013 for the bankable feasibility study.

The following question coming from the line of Greg Barnes, TD Securities.

Aaron, couple of questions. First on the dividend. Obviously, it's good to see the dividend increase. But on 2012, at current gold prices, we're looking at a payout ratio, our estimate is about 15% after CapEx is spent. Is that a level you're comfortable at? Or do you see a higher payout ratio being something you could sustain?

I think, Greg, as Jamie highlighted in the presentation, we're trying to strike a balance between investing in the projects we have, managing the balance sheet and returning capital back to shareholders. And so when you look at where we are today and in 2012, we will continue to have a fairly healthy CapEx program, particularly as we finish off Pueblo Viejo and Pascua-Lama. And so there will be capital demands, which will be required there. And so I think that the dividend increase that we announced today, clearly, we're comfortable with it. And as we get further into 2012, and if the markets continue to perform as we expect, then clearly, we'll be -- continue to revisit our dividend levels, consistent with what has happened over the past 5 years.

Okay. Second question, I couldn't help but noticing on the slides at Chimiwungo that you got a $3.50 per pound copper pit shell on there. Should I be drawing any conclusions from that?

No.

No in terms of your long-term price or resource out for that mine?

No, that's not indicative of what we think the long-term price is. But for planning purposes, that's what the exploration folks have used.

The following question coming from the line of Paretosh Misra with Morgan Stanley.

Two questions actually. One is, I noticed there was a CapEx increase for 2011. Any main drivers there?

The CapEx increase this year reflect the increase of amount of expenditures at both Pueblo Viejo -- primarily at Pueblo Viejo and Pascua-Lama. And that's consistent with the increases that we announced in the second quarter.

Got it, okay. And the second, I was hoping if you could share some thoughts on the right capital structure for the company, like, do you have any debt-to-EBITDA or debt-to-capital that you target for the company?

I think that as a -- one of the overriding objectives we have is to preserve strong credit ratings. Right now, we do have, I think, good credit ratings. We're A- with S&P and Baa1 with Moody's. And so we're kind of consistent, or the ratings are kind of consistent with where we'd like to see. So we kind of, I think, use those as a benchmark in the ratio, some of the ratios kind of come out of that. I'd suggest though that our preference would be -- we have taken on some debt for the Equinox transaction, and our preference would be to delever the balance sheet somewhat, but in line with, as I said earlier, balancing, returning capital back to shareholders, as well as investing in the opportunities we have in our pipeline.

The following question coming from the line of Jorge Beristain, Deutsche Bank.

I had 2 questions. Maybe a first one for Aaron. If you could clarify again some of the comments you made earlier about the new Argentine emergency decree that they've passed to keep, as far as we understand, 100% of export revenue in the country. Could you just clarify if there would be any exemptions for Pascua-Lama or how you would manage that FX exposure?

Okay. Maybe I'll make a few comments, and then I might ask Kelvin Dushnisky, who's our of Head of Government Affairs, to comment as well. We understand the -- the mechanism, or the way it works right now is -- and this is, I guess, what the oil and gas industry had been working under, is previously, 30% of their revenues, they would have to repatriate. And then, there's a process to, again, to take them out of the country. And so based on that process, as we understand it, that the revenues that we would generate, you have to bring back, but then you can subsequently remit them for dividends or debt repayments or other means. But they will be subject to a transaction tax which I understand is about 1.2%. So that's the mechanism. In terms of -- so as we understand it, there's no restrictions in terms of our ability to get capital out of the country. There's just a process that you have to go through to achieve that. We have that discussion, as I mentioned, with the government. Kelvin, I don't know if there's anything else you'd like to add?

Aaron, I think you've covered it well. I mean, it's not about a prohibition on currency exchange, about control, and we're having those discussions right now with the government, so I think you've covered it well.

And my second question, this was related to the guidance that you're intoning, I think, about a 10% cost inflation for 2012 estimates. And my understanding is because of your proactive hedging as you mentioned on oil, you're basically covered there. You do a lot of FX hedging, steel prices are falling globally. So where is it that you're seeing the greatest amount of cost inflation that would lead you to have this kind of overall 10% increase?

Jorge, I think it's probably 2 things we'd point out. As you pointed out and as Jamie highlighted, we do have protection against some of our commodity exposures, energy and currency. But one of the other areas however, is labor. And so we are seeing a significant labor inflation in many places where we operate, ranging from 8% or so in Chile and Argentina, probably north of 20% -- sorry, 8% in Chile and Peru, up north of 20% in Argentina, 70% in Australia, north of 8% in Tanzania and north of 10% in Zambia. So I think labor is a big component. And then the other...

Sorry to interrupt. Did I hear you say 70% or 7% in Australia?

7%. 7%, sorry. Yes. You going to have some pretty happy people in Australia if they got 70%. So that's one of the drivers. And the other driver is royalties. So with the higher gold price, if that's to have an impact. And then the last factor is really mix in terms of where the ounces are coming from next year and the impact on grades.

The following question is coming from the line of David Haughton with BMO.

You've had a pretty good year so far this year. Jamie has given a little bit of an insight into 2012 that Jorge had also touched on. The exploration success, I guess, has been a bit of a standout for Rob. When thinking about the 2012 budget, can you see an increase in money going towards Rob's endeavors?

Yes. I think that as we -- our approach to exploration is not to have a fixed budget. There's a base budget and then where we will increase it depending on success. So I think that you can see the increase in exploration budget this year was up quite a lot compared to last year. And I think it really reflects the progress that Rob has been making, particularly at Gold Rush and Red Hills, as well as Turquoise Ridge and some of the programs that we have. And so you shouldn't be surprised to see that the exploration budget might be up as well.

Of course, the other part of that is just an acceleration of some of the work that you're doing, turquoise Ridge, you're looking at the pre-feas coming out later 2012, feasibility possibly '13. Can you see that timeline being compressed?

To be realistic, probably not. I assure you that we would like to compress it as much as we can for all of these programs. But the reality is there's just a lot of work that has to be done, and it just takes time. So we are trying to move forward as fast as we can, but there are just practical limitations to our ability to do that.

And I guess another one, just wanting to pin you down a little bit more is looking at Red Hill and Gold Rush. Obviously, a very interesting and growing development. What kind of timeline can you put around that to bring it into a production base?

Well, I think I'll ask Rob to maybe comment on that.

Okay. So just to reiterate, the objective of 2011 and 2012 program is really to scope out the entire extent of the mineralized system ,and also to define a measured and indicated and inferred resource, hopefully around the end of 2012. But that's obviously going to depend on the ultimate scale and the footprint of those deposits. And this program's including step-out holes to define the limits, as well as the infill holes to confirm the continuity, and drill spacings roughly at about 150 to 200-foot centers. The resource that we generate, that's going to form the basis of the pre-feasibility study. And we've already started preliminary engineering and scoping level studies such as geotech work, metallurgy, hydrology, environmental and so on, and they're being carried out concurrently with the exploration program to try and advance the project as quickly as we can. So once the final geological modeling has been completed, hopefully around Q2 2013, again depending on the ultimate scale and footprint, the pre-feasibility study is planned to commence, and that's probably going to take about a year, Peter, to complete?

Yes.

And preliminary condemnation drilling is also planned to commence in 2013 to try and determine where the prospective areas are -- or rather, the less prospective areas are for placing waste dumps, infrastructure and to support the engineering studies. Beyond that, [indiscernible] extensive permitting phase.

With that infrastructure, are you thinking here about a stand-alone operation, or as a satellite for some existing infrastructure?

It's Peter here. We're actually doing some various trade-off studies, David, while we look at -- one option is to rail the ore to Goldstrike where you've got an existing facility, which is obvious you've got lots of benefits versus stand-alone. So that's in the process at the moment.

The following question coming from the line of Adam Graf, Dahlman Rose. Adam P. Graf - Dahlman Rose & Company, LLC, Research Division: Just to revisit the Argentine situation. So my understanding from your comments that you anticipate approximately a 1.2% transaction fee on all revenues coming from Veladero and potentially part of Pascua-Lama?

Yes, that's our understanding of how the mechanics work. Adam P. Graf - Dahlman Rose & Company, LLC, Research Division: And when will that -- will that kick in, in the fourth quarter?

Well, the decree is immediate so theoretically, it would. I think the thing that we have to work out is we're investing in Pascua-Lama, the capital right now. So we can use the capital from Veladero to be redirected. Well, it's already being redirected to invest in Pascua-Lama. So there might be some benefits from that. But we just -- we're still working this through, so we haven't been able to come to grounds just on exactly what the impact might be in the next couple of years. Adam P. Graf - Dahlman Rose & Company, LLC, Research Division: And then just a follow-up, the transaction fee. So if you were to take your dollars and then buy the pesos, that incurs the 1.2% transaction fee? And then is there also a transaction fee if you were to attempt to -- once, presumably Veladero and Pascua-Lama combined, were generating net positive or free cash flows, then you would then also have to incur a transaction fee in order to take those pesos back to dollars to take them to Canada. Is that...

Yes, I think there's probably 2 things here. The first is if you deposit money, you pay 0.6%. And then when you withdraw money, you pay 0.6% so that's the 1.2% that we're referring to. Yes. Adam P. Graf - Dahlman Rose & Company, LLC, Research Division: Okay. You don't pay it twice, is what I'm getting at.

No. Well, yes, you're paying 0.6% and 0.6%. You're paying 0.6% twice. Adam P. Graf - Dahlman Rose & Company, LLC, Research Division: Got you. Okay. Well, I think that certainly clears things up on this issue that's certainly impacted the markets, some of the names in the market yesterday and has not been clarified by others.

Right. Okay. Well, look, as we learn more, if there's anything relevant, we'll obviously keep you informed.

The following question coming from the line of Pawel Rajszel, Veritas Investment Research.

Just a couple of more questions on Argentina and the situation there. Do you have any sense about how permanent or temporary the decree is? And then is this transaction fee a kind of withholding tax? Is this -- in other words, is this transaction fee going to the government?

On your first question with respect to permanence, we don't have a sense of that. As I said, we've -- I think this was -- as it was just introduced yesterday, and we've had some preliminary discussions with the Secretary of Mines and some other government officials, we don't have a sense yet at this point. And so your second question was -- if you'd repeat your second question?

Withholding tax, is the transaction fee a kind of a withholding tax? Is that transaction fee going to the coffers of the government for example?

I assume it's going to the coffers of the government. But the transaction fee applies to everybody. So even in-country transactions are subject to this transaction fee.

Okay. And then given that Pascua-Lama is on the border, do you see a kind of split of the revenues there? Can you manage where the production can be originated from -- sourced from officially to mitigate the transaction fee?

Yes. That's an added complication for Pascua-Lama, and I don't have an answer for you at this point.

Okay. And it seems like Argentina is trying to slow this flight of capital that they've been having, and the math doesn't really make sense for me in terms of it being a valid solution. What's your sense of how far Argentina might be willing to go in terms of maybe being more harsher on the mining industry in order to achieve their goals?

I don't think we're really in a position to comment. What I would say is that there's been a lot of support for our operations in Argentina from both Governor Gioja, who's the governor of San Juan; as well as President Kirchner. And so we clearly draw comfort from that. But beyond that, I'd really be speculating.

Okay. And then lastly, just on Zambia, do you have a particular tax range in mind for the change?

Kelvin, do you...

There isn't. I can tell you though that we're there, and we've met with the Ministry of Finance, as well as the Mines Ministry on our own and together with the chamber. And the feedback we've received is that the government is looking for the industry to help contribute to the budget for 2012. They've been clear that they don't want to impose something that's considered unreasonable or creates any negative implication, longer-term implications for the industry. So they're taking a very consultative approach but at this point, there haven't been conclusions reached but very constructive engagement.

And our last question coming from the line of Brian MacArthur, UBS.

I'm sorry to go back to Argentina again, because I realize it's a developing situation. But can you just remind me how much the original capital Pascua-Lama would've been spent from the Argentinian side versus the Chilean side? Because presumably, if you can use your profits from Veladero into that zone, unless it's viewed as an exclusion zone, I would've thought in the near term, regardless what happens or ultimately comes out, there'd be a fair bit of shelter. Or is that incorrect?

Well, in terms of your first question, the capital on the Argentinian side is roughly about 2/3 of the overall capital. The Chilean side is really more about the mine, mine development, whereas the process and facilities are on the Lama side or the Argentinian side.

Okay. So if you can repeat -- presumably, profits in Veladero stay in the country and theoretically would not be affected by this? Or is that not -- you're sort of indicating you may be able to shelter it a bit. Or is that correct?

Brian, we're still working this through. Like the -- the transaction tax will likely still apply because you still have money going in, and then you have to redirect it towards the capital for Pascua-Lama. So preliminary, and we'd have to confirm on this, but intuitively, I think that that still applies. But what you may avoid is the issue of potentially having a currency exposure between the timing of the phases when you get them out. So you might be able to avoid that.

That helps a lot. And just secondly, you talked a little bit about production mix being one of the factors next year. Obviously, we have Pueblo coming in, I don't -- maybe half or quarter of a year, that should be lower. Cortez obviously had a good year this year, maybe it's not quite as good. But can you just go over where, just roughly, the production mix changes? It's just taking like lower grade stuff out of the big pits because the globe price has gone up? Or is it like a change in South America from just Lagunas and Veladero? Just where are the major production mixes would be year-over-year?

Brian, maybe you can bear with us. We're still finalizing our budgets for next year. So on a preliminary basis, that's sort of the picture that we have. PV for example, there won’t be a huge amount of production out of PV because we'll be ramping up and because we're at the early stages. Those'll probably be higher-cost ounces until we get it ramped up. But that's -- maybe you can bear with us. And in our February call, we'll be happy to give you a lot more details.

I will now turn the call back to Mr. Regent. Please continue with your presentation or closing remarks.

Okay. Well, thanks, operator. Well, thank you for everybody for joining our call today, and we appreciate your questions. And with that, we'll conclude the call, and I hope you all have a good day. Thank you.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude our call for today. We thank you for your participation and ask that you please disconnect your lines.