Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to the Barrick 2019 Third Quarter Results Conference Call. During the presentation, all participants are in listening-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder this conference call is being recorded and a replay will be available on Barrick's website later today, November 6, 2019. You will now be connected to the conference room with the presentation will begin momentarily. You may hear silence until it begins.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen to everyone particularly who have dialed in here today and I will pose a very good afternoon to all of you who made the effort to come out here. I did explain when we announced the potential merger between Randgold and Barrick that we would come back to London and present to you our progress and you'll be pleased to know that yesterday we had the formal Barrick board meeting here in London as well. So we did keep our word. And so it's now just over 10 months since the merger between Barrick and Randgold Resources went live. That stated aim of the new Barrick was to create the world's most valued mining company and in the process to set an example of a modern mining business for an industry in need of invigoration and there is no better time to talk about this because really everyone does morning but it's an absolute core component of everyday life and we as miners have a big challenge to get accepted by the communities and the investment, the investors as well. And we at Barrick are absolutely committed to make sure that we change the way we do business on a day-to-day basis. It's very pleasing today as we report on our results for the first quarter or the third quarter since the merger, to share with you the progress that we've made and where we’re going to achieve exactly that goal. Before we go any further, please take note of the cautionary notice which is also on our website for those slow readers or some anybody who wants to sort of delve deeper into the statement. This is our scorecard that we shared with the world back in on the 23rd of September 2018, when…

We will now begin the question-and-answer session along the phone. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Chris Terry of Deutsche Bank.

Hi, Mark and team thanks for taking my questions. I have a few, just wanted if you could start with the five-year guidance. If you could make some comments on the conservatism or what you've actually baked into it for example, the Nevada synergies that you still going through and made great progress on and just wanted whether you're putting the full number in for that, for example, just other areas of improvement and whether you've just at this point put in projects that are fully approved just getting an idea given you've been towards the top end in 2019 of that guidance, if it’s potentially conservative or mid-case? Thanks.

So, as you know, I'm never one who sort of under province, under promises to over deliver. So this is our best business case based on what we believe we can deliver. There are opportunities, some of them that are pointing to your, for instance, how we can bring PV expansion on and whether we can improve efficiencies but as we stand this is our first dash at a scoping study. We've got the pre-fees running now with the processing plant. We haven't quite finalized the detail in the flow sheet. So there's, I would say there's some option upside opportunity there. Of course, there's ongoing drilling between the two current pits. And that has some opportunity. But as far as our current reserves and our current orebody models are, we've included all that, Veladero has some opportunities that we don't, we are not, we don't have sort of visibility on yet because there's still quite a bit of drilling to be done to be able to lift the life of mine. We know that it looks very prospective, but again, that will come out in that 10-year plan rather than the current five year plan. Nevada, we have baked in the synergies that we can see and that we've identified, we've got no doubt that there will be improvements. Those improvements are largely expected to come from the continued optimization of our orebodies. And also there is we need to do some work on the call and processing facilities in particular the Mill 6 roaster, which at the moment is quite expensive, its operating costs are high as a single bed roaster and we are going to be expanding that because it's an important facility for Goldrush and will be improving both its ability to scrub Mercury out of…

Thanks, thanks Mark for the color. Just in terms of the balance sheet, you're obviously now below $3.5 billion net debt. Just wondering if you could comment a little bit on potential use of proceeds from the $1.5 billion of asset sales, you flagged, you obviously increased the dividend, a little bit on this quarter versus last quarter. So just wondering, where you are thinking about the use of use of proceeds? Thanks.

So is your definition of a little of that is 25%. I wonder what you think is a lot. So we've got many opportunities to create value for our stakeholders. We said we were doing this because we saw the value in being the standout gold company with a dominant ownership of Tier 1 assets. And as you've seen, almost surprisingly, it's now three quarters into our project and we've been able to wind down the debt, increase the cash positions, we rolled over revolver facility and dropped it to $3 billion because we're comfortable about where we are, we came out with an early dividend because again as you pointed out, and when you look at our five-year plan, what's clear is there is some investment we need to make in 2022 to sort of tidy up the organization. But then if you look at the five-year plan, the costs are coming down, capitals coming down, we've got a real focus on sustaining capital. And of course, when costs come down and capital comes down, cash flows go up. So that's the whole objective of doing business. What we do with those proceeds, we have again something that I really believe in is that in mining, you should deliver returns to your shareholders, and in particular, the best way is dividends. There are other mechanisms that we can consider and we'll consider like buying back shares as we change our asset portfolio, sort of color, but at the same time, I believe that we’re going to replace some of the assets that we're going to sell with better looking at it, not that the ones we’re selling are bad. It just don’t fit to our specific investment focus. So, and we have not very much depleted our debt, our…

Thanks. Thanks Mark. Just the last one for me. What's the timing you’re thinking for the potential inclusion of Fourmile into the JV? Thanks, that's it.

Now, that's we want to thank that properly right now with that new discovery hallway at a kilometer from any of our resource estimates, it really does open that opportunity substantially and we've got lot of comfort that Goldrush is at a stage where it's a matter of process to bank it and then it's about access to the Fourmile deposit whether we do it via Goldrush infrastructure, we bring -- we come in with an opportunity to come in from an old pits on the other side of the trend is a couple of things that we still want to do. And I think, first of all, let's build a portfolio. We've only got couple of hundred thousand ounces, they're not 250,000, 700,000 ounces. So we’re expecting a substantial increase in inventory with our annual declarations early next year. But I would say it's a couple of years before we are comfortable that we've got the critical mass to warrant moving that to a feasibility stage project, what I would add, and it's something that we've had great debates over is Rod is Head of Projects and Evaluation is starting to take a much bigger focus on this project now because it's reasonably well framed. And so a lot of process rather than exploration endeavor. And we've encouraged Rod and his I mean Rob Krcmarov and his team to move away and find the next one, and not get bogged down by ongoing drilling in this project. Rod do you want to add anything to that?

Yes, sorry. I'll just repeat that because microphones are on. That based on that we reported this quarter. Some of the best, obviously the best result is. So there's opportunity Western side as well. And within Fourmile as well, Western most age of that of that current Fourmile resources very much open, but a bunch of drilling to be done coming next 12 months to actually thought how big that Fourmile current resources.

So just to, for those yes and I don’t know if you can see my pointer, but what Rod's talking about is that this trend, which is there is the Greater Goldrush Fourmile trend, what we seeing is on the Western side, that's the side there tends to be a plunge to the orebody there and there and there and so on that in Goldrush. And so we haven't drilled that Western edge of the mineralization and we’re expecting to build extended mineralization to the ways. So we've still got quite a bit of work to do to close off those, those trends. The big thing for me is there's more to find. Yes, we've got large dialed trend which is sub-parallel to the Goldrush, Fourmile trend to the west of the trend as you see on that slide, and then we've got another couple of outlier intersections, positive intersections to the East. And so are they sub-parallel trends to this main mineralized trend going forward.

Our next question comes from Matthew Murphy of Barclays.

Hi, I'm just chewing through some of the five-year guidance here and looking at North America, the Turquoise Ridge production looks fairly steady through 2024 despite that third shaft coming on, so I guess should we be reading from that that cut-off grades are going to get dropped further in the 2022, 2023 timeframe?

Absolutely. So that's I mean, that's one of our big issues is that when we took over Barrick, Barrick was absolutely obsessed with high grading its orebodies. And it was appropriate for that phase in its last because it was dealing with some massive debts coming from $12 billion of debt. But we said at the time, we would reoptimize the orebody and allow the orebodies to manage the life of mine. And that's critical, because when you have Tier 1 assets, the two components of value that you have for your shareholders. One is the ability, the margin, and the gold price. The other is the cyclicality of the gold industry. And with the Tier 1 asset plus 10 years, you get that cycle and so you don't want to go over mine your orebody, you want to optimize it for the long-term. And that's what we've done and we will continue to do, I mean Turquoise Ridge has got significant upside opportunity in the Brownfields extensions of the known reserves. Remember the reserves are significant at Turquoise Ridge, and we've still got more, we've got the older extensions, the open pit opportunities and the trade-off of whether we go underground or come back and take a bigger lower grade cut, but right now we've brought the cut-off grades down from over 12 grams a ton and our target is to get down to about six and a half is the target. You want to add to that?

Anything I will add is Turquoise Ridge is very much working progress. We've just obviously debottlenecked stretching point of view, right TMA point of view. So that's out of the way in that pushing obviously the plant you would have seen the initial increases coming through this quarter. But obviously that's working progress, we got to see how, how hard we can push that front with the various fields. And then unison to that as Mark was saying, How big is the orebody and then reoptimize the hole and open pit et cetera to fill that plant with the best grade we can with the long-term view. So there is a lot of work still to come.

Got you, okay. And then just as it relates to that, the near-term synergy shows you've already done $73 million executed or advancing there. Do you see upside to that near-term synergy number?

Of course, we do. So one of them is, is as Rod says, the plant expansion and again, one would just bear in mind, we've just changed the whole management structure at Turquoise Ridge, in fact for the Barrick Group, I think the only two people in senior management and the operations that were there when we arrived, the rest is all new. And we've just changed the leadership on the process implemented to increase and we've jacked up the throughput. So there's a lot more work to do on efficiencies. I think John and his team have got really shown that just even in the approach the standard operating procedures when it comes to Autoclave is how we manage the fuel in the Autoclaves and the temperature and the ability to treat higher energies, higher fuel, we've got a lot of work to do right across the group but Turquoise Ridge in particular. John, do you want to add something to that? You got to push the button over there, it will go red.

Okay, got it. Yes, I think the first phase is Twin Creeks was really just raising the densities and the feet to the autoclave to give us an additional 15% to 20% but we're trialing that now. It's going well. It's really a trade-off slight trade-off against recovery. But the key is maximizing the ounce production and the cost per ounce and that's what we're chasing there.

And Matt, we've also got a lot of work to do and right now we’re constrained through the environment now that's why the shaft is so critical because it changes our entire ventilation protocol. And that will and in the meantime, we are working hard at fully automating the mining in Turquoise Ridge, its geo-tech conditions are challenging, so it’s self miners, which we've got a second one in the steps now is important. We have already got back full process fully automated and will that's our focus and of course electric underground vehicles will also help in managing the environment. We got a lot of stuff to do to be able to pick-up the efficiencies there. But this is based on what we can do today.

Interesting, okay. Great, thank you.

Our next question comes from Tanya Jakusconek of Scotiabank.

Great, good afternoon, everybody. And thanks for taking my question. I have two questions. The first one that has to do with the five-year guidance, just a bit more clarity. I know you have some footnotes at the end of the presentation but just wanted to ask for is Long Canyon Phase 2 included in your forecasts?

No.

Right and then maybe Mark why has something changed that at Massawa that you've included in to your forecast such, I was under the impression it didn't meet your hurdle rate? Maybe something's changed there.

No, Massawa, if it was in Randgold, we would have developed it, it is busy we are, we've got a business plan for it, we are applying for the permits and we will deal with it as and when we have secured the permits. Graham wants to say something.

Well I just want to say that 1,200 which is the goal line that we use, investment decisions now it does meet us.

Okay.

Okay. So you have moved, I thought we were still at $1,000 hurdle rate of 20%. So it has been moved to $1200?

You clearly haven't read the footnotes.

Okay, well, I think I did that. But maybe just coming back to Kibali and I think Mark you mentioned plus 600,000 ounces over the next 10 years from that asset and just a little bit more clarity, is some of that coming from the open pit additional open pit material from the drilling that you've been encountering lately?

So we've got a whole lot of new opportunities, we have got the new, the pit we have got and it will change as we go, Cumba, Gorumbwa is a pit that’s already in the mine plan which is open pit, we've got a number of targets, we are evaluating, as I said in the presentation along the KZ zone. There's a prospect of a Super Pit and joining this Sessenge and KCD pits. So but right now what that plan entails is only the reserves, we haven't added resources or soon to be discovered ounces, Simon?

Okay, and then just Loulo Tongon also?

Just wait, Simon is going to?

Okay.

10 year mine life profile of open cast runs to be entire through the 10-year profile.

So that Simon says the 10-year plan has open cast material for the entire 10 years.

Okay, I think it was a bit different than that.

And Tanya, we have got visibility of some significant millions of ounces of potential resources that have every reason for us to consider them to be converted to reserves both at Loulo-Gounkoto and at Kibali and I would point out that that is where we want to get the full group to. That's where we’re going, these are legacy Randgold assets. They have a rolling 10-year plan and that's where our objective is for the rest of the group.

Okay, and similarly with Loulo-Gounkoto a bit longer on the Gounkoto side?

The Gounkoto there is two things, one is the pit has produced more ounces than our original feasibility are the point I would always make on behalf of our team is our feasibility studies have all been delivered against and some. And so the Gounkoto pit is certainly going to beat its plan as original Super Pit plan. And then we've got a new underground section at Gounkoto. So another phase of investments for Gounkoto and again, that 10-year plan doesn't include every all the potential that we see in extending the high grade zone of Yalea which we refer to in today's results, which again has delivered some significant step-out results. And so and we've still got Loulo 3 that we have got a lot of work to do and so we’re not short of potential in the Loulo-Gounkoto district.

Okay, and then maybe just on the copper guidance, you have the chloride leach in for Zaldivar in that plant. Can you remind me Graham, what the capital is for that?

Yes, so the approximate amount is about $170 million.

Okay.

And we haven't finished that feasibility study, Tanya we’re busy with it.

Yes, okay. And then maybe just my second question is actually for both Rob or Rod, it’s got to do with the reserves and resources that are coming out and I guess it's February. And I think you had talked about doing reserves at 1200 and resources at 1500. And I think Mark, you've talked a lot also on the call about areas where you see reserves increasing and resource increasing. So I wanted to circle back with Rob and Rod on couple of these assets. I think Leeville, I think you said there's multi-ounce potential there. Will that be in the resource category?

Yes, in Leeville, Tanya we will still take some time to get into resource but there's a lot of inventory potentially that will be coming. Just looking at sort of reserves Goldstrike Underground and the Carlin Underground mine in total will more than replenish depletion. Kibali we had mentioned is going to do well, Loulo-Gounkoto is doing pretty well. So those are obviously some of the key assets.

Veladero will, PV will?

Yes, PV not yet until the feasibility comes there is a lot of potential there sitting outside reserve and resource and just waiting for that feasibility to come but that won't come this year. Yes, there is some good news. Obviously from a Barrick perspective, there will be increases because of acquisitions and merger with Randgold, that are coming through the JV helps us in Nevada obviously. There's quite a big uptick there in ounces coming through in that JV of that 61%, but more.

And Turquoise Ridge, Rod, I think you're going to be changing the cutoff grade there. So there's multi-million ounces adding to reserve there?

Yes, we will be obviously we're going from 75 down to 61 at Turquoise Ridge in particular, but it's the whole complex that you're looking at, and you're obviously dropping the cut-off immediately because of that TMA is out of it, it increases, it increases ounces.

So that's the cut-off grade if you look do the math, it's about north of a million ounces that it adds and you look at the depletion for that asset even with the 61%. The math said it should be better. I think Tania one thing I would point out to you is, we have used 1200 on estimating our life of mines, we will be using 1200 and is 1200 long-term goal was flat and 15% IRR sort of focus. On PV, you need to know that the conversion Rod refers to is from measured and indicated, so these ounces are there and the economic at 1200, all we need is to prove that we can put the tailings somewhere and they become reserves. So it's important for you to appreciate that there's no extra drilling on the additional 11 million ounces, we refer to in the report is no extra drilling to be able to convert that into reserves, it really is just the permitting of the TSF.

Yes, but we’re not expecting that at year-end, I think Rob said that.

As Rob said and we have said it is through the next year.

The only other thing Tanya I would add is that 1200 moving from 1000 to 1200, I mean really only affecting the legacy Randgold assets, and both of those orebodies, so the Loulo-Gounkoto orebodies and the Kibali orebody is very geologically constrained. So it's actually these increases we’re talking about are coming from Kibali are not driven by that $200 increase. They are real actual orebody extensions that we're bringing in. We've actually brought in very little of that adjustment.

Okay, I'll leave someone else to ask question. Thanks a lot, guys.

Our next question comes from Anita Soni of CIBC.

Good morning, guys. My question is a little bit more high level, could you give me a sort of a breakout in 2020 and 2021, what the difference between the sustaining and the project capital expenditure is?

Good, but I won’t.

But that won’t help me modeling. But I will move to my next question, can you highlight to me then the major drivers for the difference between the current sustaining or total capital expenditures this year at 1.4 to 1.7. And then you're moving up towards like a $1.9 billion or $2 billion for the next couple of years. What are the pinpoint three good things?

It’s just the next year 2020. And you can see it on the chart. So as I say to you, $200 million on Kibali which is quite sort of variable at the moment is that's what we used in our bid model and we don't have the ability to share to you in any detail that'll come with the feasibility study. We've got the additional capital and PV. Again, that's a long-term capital commitment. And there is some extra capital in Loulo-Gounkoto on developments. And the rest is pretty much as per the shared job is a bit more capital in Veladero as well.

All right, so you just…

I’m sorry.

Just go ahead.

You said like how much do you said the capital was?

I’m looking at this chart, and I'm like, maybe my ruler is incorrect, or I need better glasses. But the blue line you have here basically shows that it sort of pretty flat from 2020 to 2021 for the total capital number at $2 billion.

As Mark says, a lot of that is to do with the investment that's going in for the development of Veladero, for the development of PV, extra capital at Loulo to ensure that we've got a 10-year plan there. So a lot of this capital is really as Mark mentioned in his speech going to give us benefits in a 10 year plan, five-year plan, but of course we are working towards a long-term business here.

And I think Anita just to soften Graham’s undiplomatic response to the split in sustaining and capital is that it's an absolute obsession of mine to bring the sustaining capital down and we've got a lot of focus in that part of our business and once we get granularity on that, we will start sharing it with you.

Thank you very much.

Our next question comes from Greg Barnes of TD Securities.

Thank you, Mark. Given the free cash flow this company should generate and I know we debated about the dividends in the past but do you see a model where Barrick could commit to doing something like the major diversified do, which is paying out 30% to 50% of net profits on an ongoing basis as a dividend?

Greg, all I can say is I will refer you back to our Randgold business, we paid 13 years of increasing dividends on the back of a long-term plan, despite what the gold price did. It went up and down not necessarily in that order through that period. So I’m more of the view that in any business there's a sort of requirement of cash reserves to ensure that you can deliver the business and the one thing, I've been in this industry longer than most people on this call or in this room. And the one thing you never want to be, is beholding on the market for money. And so that's our business. It's a long-term business, everyone says it, but very few people manage their business on a long-term basis we do and so we will, as a gold business, if you, our job is to give our owners maximum exposure to the gold price, which we and I have done so in my entire career, and I expect to be able to continue to do that. So, we have no doubt that we can deliver that five-year plan and the 10-year plan that we’re working on and the life of mine plan at any conceivable gold price without having to beg any money from anyone. And I have no intention of putting that strength at risk. So we've seen through my career as you have Greg, peoples trying to link dividends to gold price, dividends to this, everyone has a fad. My job is to convert reserves into cash flow, make sure we've got enough to be able to invest in our own future and give the rest to our shareholders and a substantial part of that to stakeholders like host countries in the form of profits tax.

Great, thanks Mark.

Our next question comes from Andrew Kaip of BMO.

Hey good morning, gentlemen, and congratulations on a good quarter. I've got just three quick questions. One of them is just looking at the Nevada Gold Mine near-term synergies, it looks like you've reclassified buckets between Turquoise Ridge and regional on site based indirects, wondering if you can just confirm that?

Yes, Andrew, let me answer that first. If you go back to our presentation on our website for the Nevada analyst visit, you would have seen that we shifted the shape of the pie a little bit, and we will continue to do that, so there's some, there's some swings and roundabouts in this and that's what we're effectively doing. So what you’re observing is correct.

Okay, thanks. And then look, I'm wondering if somebody can help me understand the scope of the metallurgical test work that's being done at Pueblo Viejo, I noticed in the discussion, you're also you're starting to look at flash oxidation. And I'm just wondering what the opportunities, and the risks are relative to fine grinding and floatation as a means to expand the operation?

So I think we've gone past that. And, and it's not flash oxidation, it's using flash vessels to cool them and allow the autoclave to process higher energy feed. So the original if you remember before I pass it on to the experts, the original flow sheet was a combination of floatation and then partial leach up oxidation using water in a heap. And then it was when John got there, we looked at vessel oxidation, so floatation more floatation, floating most of the feet apart from the high grade fleet and then ultra fine grinding it and then with oxygen doing partial oxidation of the sulfides and vessels. This way is a much more effective way, it's proven technology in the platinum industry. So it's not new technology at all. It's just hasn't been applied in the golden industry because the gold industry doesn't have lots of ore with piles of sulfide. So how did I do John?

Yes, that is pretty good, it is pretty good. Yes, that is exactly as we have gone down the route of testing, the ultra fine grind in the tank oxidation where we get about 40% of the sulfide oxidized. But we are very familiar and the operators are very familiar with pressure oxidation. So this proposal to adopt flash recycle or flash second recycle is, is extremely attractive to the operation because it's known technology and our application to oxidize and relieve the heat from higher sulfide feet, it's ideal for us. So that's the opportunity for us is lower capital is lower OpEx in terms of our approach. So that's the number one priority for us at the moment. And it no replaces the ultra fine grind tank oxidation as our priority flow sheet. So, it will be flash that can recycle is the optimum that we’ll be pursuing going forward into the pre-feasibility.

And it also reduces the footprint on as far as the operating footprint goes, because you don't have so much infrastructure and space is quite critical in PV for us.

All right. It sounded like that, that you were moving in that route. So thanks very much. And then one final question just quickly on Lagunas and it’s on current maintenance but are you going to continue residual leaching at that operation? Are you shutting that down?

No, so again, this is important about having proper plans, it still got significant potential reserves in the form of sulfide ore, refractory ore. I got to a point where the oxide ore was running out, it was very complicated process to try and do it on a heap. And our view is that put it on current maintenance and make sure that we use the cash flow from the residual ongoing leaching to invest in our exploration endeavor around Lagunas and we have three significant oxide targets, one quite well defined which we’re busy permitting and then we've also got three in addition to the ongoing drilling we’re doing in the current pits to expand the reserve base. We have three additional satellites so far satellites that we will also be evaluating. The objective is to lift the reserves to a level where it would warrant, it would support the investment in a refractory style process which for us would probably have to be roasting. Right, John?

Yes, given the description that the geologists have of extremely carbonaceous material with, we'd be supporting a roasting thing.

You want to add anything, Rod? Okay, Rod agrees.

All right, thank you very much.

Our next question comes from John Tumazos of John Tumazos Very Independent Research.

Thank you for taking my call and congratulations on all the good work. Could you refresh us as to the reallocation procedure in the 61.5%, 38.5% Nevada Gold breakdown? Does it change? If the origin of production is one company or the other or is it reserves and as an example, if Fourmile plus the one kilometer north of Fourmile turned out to be 10 million ounces of reserves, would the new JV be?

Yes, John that is easy to answer. Now let me answer it. So the joint venture of interest that's what we put in Newmont and that goes to the 61.5%, 38.5%. Fourmile is outside the joint venture. If you -- what we have to do is this is a set formula where we have to demonstrate against create a sort of a set equation, a project that delivers more than 15% IRR assuming a gold price, which is estimated on a formula spot first look back formula on the gold price. Once that's done, we have the right to force that into the joint venture and it will be introduced or included in the joint venture at fair market value. And included and in addition to the fair market value, we would also add the cost of the feasibility study. And Newmont it has two options. It either pays us in cash to keep 38.5% ratio or dilute. That’s how it works.

Thank you for that explanation. Thank you very much.

Okay, so I'm going to move to London now as or is there one more? One more, okay.

Our final question from the phone comes from Adam Graf of B. Riley Financial.

Hey, guys, thanks for taking my question. I just have a couple of quick questions about Nevada. What's something you said Mark picked my interest about the sterilized ore that you guys are now examining at Carlin? And I was just curious about that and how that came about because I was under the -- I had the understanding that previously Newmont and Barrick had layback agreement. So I’m curious where the sterilized ore is coming from?

So I’m going to show you that Newmont and Barrick had very few agreements, they might have had the intention to reach an agreement but there's always, there's been a lot of I mean just at Turquoise Ridge, Twin Creek as well, there was opportunity to rationalize the resources across the boundary where it was accessible from one and not the other. And the same goes for Carlin Goldstrike and the three projects that I referred to in my presentation all along that Carlin Goldstrike trend, is about million ounces small amount is from the pits and the others are from underground with easily accessible from Goldstrike but it's in the Carlin side and vice versa. So it's that so those sort of things. I mean, there's lots, there is ability to use now that we own all surface, building roads, which again was always made difficult because of the sort of bureaucratic impasse between the corporates. And there's a number of other opportunities for us to unlock synergies because we no longer have a line or a fence that, that that demand some sort of settlement agreement.

Yes, and then just you mentioned the deep drill holes that hit the high grade ore, Little Boulder Basin, that's two kilometers down. And I was curious conceptually with current technology, is that something that's actually you believe it's actually accessible at this point?

So I come from South Africa. So two kilometers down is not grassroots. These are massive intersections. The debate then and you can look at it intersection but the debate is they've drilled through the Intrusive and hit the sort of target packages below the Intrusive. The question is, is that Intrusive stoked out large potential resource, or what we find is that we carry on drilling and that's so right now if we’re drilling a single hole to check it out, and we'll let you know and decide once we pull that metal.

And I thought there were waste dumps that were sitting above it. Are you drilling through the waste dumps to get under there, are you able to drill directionally from that?

No, we just drilled through from surface, it's a big area, and we just want to get through the Intrusive and check the stratography. And as you know, you're going to have to get down there underground. So waste dumps are not an important prospect, you are not playing to do an open pit down to two kilometers.

No, certainly not. And then finally at Leeville, multi, you guys believe that there's multi-million ounce expansion potential there with that you guys can define with over time with additional definition drilling?

Yes, there is a pattern drilling in Leeville again, the approach to Nevada both and even in Barrick but certainly in Newmont was more driven by density and pattern and we're much more geocentric in the way we do things. And we've looked at the core and we see continuity of the orebody from one borehole to the other and it's about, part of that is down to 150 meters for 500 foot spacing. And so as an inventory it’s very attractive and it's multi-million ounces potentially, but we've got some work to do before we can specifically frame it.

Do you believe that continues North past the Old point on that property?

The continuation is North and it’s North and then Southwest. So it's on either side of the main infrastructure mining infrastructure and actually in the middle of that infrastructure is Rita K, which is largely evaluated through drilling which again wasn't in the mine plan which we are now moving into our reserve and planning schedule.

Fantastic, fantastic. Thank you for answering all my questions.

Pleasure, we have London. I think the guys in the phone did a good job. Just switch to him.

Okay. Firstly thank you for giving me the entire presentation without mentioning the World Cup Rugby once, much appreciated.

You haven’t heard my finishing remarks yet.

You mentioned at the start of your presentation, the importance of ASG, which is again, it's another battleground that you're going to have to win on relative to your paper. And we get currently some safety quarterly data that you present. And is there an opportunity for you to publish them environmental quarterly data in the CO2 emissions, sport withdrawal, something like that on a quarterly basis and there is a review.

Yes, so that's a good question. But the point that I make is that, this is a battlefield when it comes to CSR, because for us, it's not compliance. It's a way of doing business. It's deep in our DNA. I can tell you right now, that emissions are down and our carbon footprint is down quarter-on-quarter. And what my challenge to everyone is fund managers, they get these sort of compliance demands and then they throw it at the mining industry without ever thinking about it. And again, we as an industry, all it does is it puts everything at risk. It's about how do we actually work differently? How do we actually allocate long-term capital and one of the CSG and not only community but ESR issues is and it's a pet subject of mine. I have the conversation many times, fund managers almost forced the industry to go to the U.S. and mind North America, somewhere safe, very promising. And our biggest single challenge in this world is poverty. It's bigger in my mind, it's a bigger challenge than everything else because it's the biggest driver to global, what you call warming or pollution is the impact of our ability to survive on our planet. And we neglect that and I've had this debate going for a long time is when you look at the pools of capital at invest in mining, we should be encouraging investing in the emerging markets and ensuring that we participate in the upliftment of the people that are left behind by society. And that's one of miners biggest contributions we can make to the whole CSR ESR challenge. And again as you can see, we've done it. You want us to structure our pay, you want us to do this, you…

Hi Mark. One thing and you talked about earlier replacement of assets, how far down would you think about kind of what's called the quality spectrum? Would you look beyond the Tier 1 assets where you stayed at the target of having the majority of them? Would you look at Tier 2 assets? You think that could become Tier 1, you’re getting below that?

So Tier 2 for us is three million ounces plus mix 20% return $1200, yes why because it's smaller, so your ability to make returns on a longer cycle. So you lose one aspect of making money in the gold industry. So we would look at that, small assets, you want a bigger return, because it's higher risk and less time to fix it when there are problems. Yes, I think for us copper is an important component of our business, 15% at the moment you've seen it make real money even the ones that we've got, which are not necessarily Tier 1 in company and so that's our focus. And I don't think you want to try and get caught up in second rate being what we'd like to be a Tier 1 business. And again, I think this industry needs to focus on something that actually can make returns in good times and in bad and I've said it before, I'll say it again. If you look at the gold industry, there are too many managers and too few quality assets. And the two top companies in the industry have led the way and consolidation. And this industry needs a lot more of that to be able to bulk up and ensure that we have enough agile, competent manage men stewarding the limited assets we've got and then spend time on finding more, which is becoming more and more challenging.

Just one other one. You made that comment earlier about providing investors the greatest exposure to gold, which I would say closely, very closely aligns with the Randgold strategy of no debt or cash to a certain point, you seem to have softened on that obviously around your views around debt. So how do you next two to three years think about higher dividends right now versus faster repayments in the debt balance?

So the debt is as I said, long-term. So we can go and blow it out. This is going to cost us twice as much and it doesn't make, it's how you make use of the money you make. And again, we're a massive organization where in other states is imminently manageable, we will on an opportunistic basis to away that but at the same time for us again chaotic expense of debt which we can manage comfortably at the expense of returning dividends to our shareholders doesn't make a whole lot of sense to us. Our CFO might have something to add.

I would agree with you. I mean, a company of this size was the diversification that we have and certainly sustain data as part of its capital structure. And I think both Mark and I are probably going to be on the conservative end of what that debt looks like, but it's appropriate to have debt in the business.

Okay, thanks guys.

Any more?

I was wondering…

So, the question was any more comment on consolidation, West Africa has been the most prolific producer of new gold mines. And it's growing some very interesting companies there. So and as they sense that consolidation or bring more optimal management costs absolutely. I think we still have, if you had to add-up the corporate costs of the industry, and you had just consolidated it. I mean, just look at the Randgold direct deal. There's in this modern world there's no real logic to have big corporate offices. Yes, we've proved that possible both at Randgold, we’ve proved this possible very quickly in just nine months at Barrick and so I think, I'm a great believer in the requirement for our industry to consolidate. West Africa is a good place where to start. And we've always said that in our rationalization of our assets, we are committed to playing a role in that ongoing consolidation, which we will do. So ladies and gentlemen, it brings me to the end of this very interesting debate. I look forward to I'm not sure when we will be back here but we will be through here often and all you guys who are in the breaking business, you'll see us and of course our shareholders. It just remains for me to point out that on your way out, there are tickets available for Rugby lessons for those English folks who would like to aspire to being in somewhere around the Finals in four years time and I would end finally by saying thank you very much for beating the old blacks. Again, thanks for coming and I look forward to catching up with you and again, anyone who is not so quick of the mark and comes up with a few questions that you haven’t managed to ask this afternoon please feel free to reach to us, you know the team we’re all available to take your questions. Thank you again.

This concludes today’s conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Should you have any additional questions, please contact the Barrick Investor Relations Department. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.