Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. This is the event operator. Welcome to Barrick's Results Presentation for the Second Quarter of 2023. Following today's presentation, a question-and-answer session will be conducted. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this event is being recorded and a replay will be available on Barrick's website later today, August 8, 2023. I would now like to turn you over to Mark Bristow, President and CEO of Barrick. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you very much and -- so we’re controlling this. Welcome, everyone. Good afternoon for those across the Atlantic and good morning for those this side of the Atlantic, and a special outcome to all of you who have given up some of the sunny weather outside to join us personally. Thank you for coming. Appreciate it. I think I felt I should start on a good news story. And that is that -- and I'm sure you all know this, certainly those sitting in the hall here, that we saw the average gold price for the last quarter at an all-time high. And it's interesting, a lot of people are suggesting that the gold price is not performing. It's performing extremely well. And for me, the more interesting part is that some see this as driven by a forecast decline in interest rates. And certainly having recently traveled right around the world, I really believe it's more about a risk on situation as we wrestle with the global economy and de-globalization of the world as a whole, and the fact that China is not -- I don't believe going to get back to where it was, it's certainly going to recover, but not back to where it was. And again, our supply chains and general investment in the economy and upliftment into -- of some of those more challenged economies are going to hurt if we don't stop and invest in it. And so, otherwise, all we're going to do is create a future where the rich continue to get richer and the poor get even poorer. And so, we held a mining summit in Islamabad last weekend. And it was very interesting for me to see the realization from Pakistan that things needed to change. And there were…

Thanks very much for the presentation. It's Jackie Przybylowski from BMO. Mark, can you talk a little bit about your plans at Zaldívar? I know, you have mentioned in the MD&A that it's now classified as non-core? Do you have plans to divest that at some point?

I think, at some point, maybe. Right now, we have just applied for the -- with Antofagasta with an extension of the life of mine and the permitting, which we are dealing with at the moment, which shows a much bigger, longer life of mine than we currently have. And the reason we say that is that, just in reporting, it's a steady, small operation. It's managed by Anto. We have a active role in that management as a joint venture partner. As you can imagine, we are not very good at standing back. But that's the basis on which we have put it in that category. And again, you know better than me. Despite the fact that the copper market is in absolute short supply, and you just have to go a little way and then there is nothing, there is a softness in the price. So at the end of the day, we will manage that strategically.

Can I ask one to follow-up as well? On Porgera. Can you talk a little bit about the process from here and what needs to be done for your restart?

So, really, it's the special mining license, which we are waiting for, which will -- we have done all the other regulatory work. We have got everything in place. We need that special mining license, which means that we have all the communities signed off. And once we can do that, we are -- and I had a very good town hall with all our key landowners when I was last there two weeks ago. And so there is no doubt everyone wants this mine opened. And it's a very significant deal because never has -- have the landowners had the potential to earn so much from a gold mine so -- or any mine in Papua New Guinea. So I think there's lots of drivers. Of course there's also the obsession with being able to negotiate the terms, which we've already settled. But that's the good thing about Papua New Guinea, as frustrating as it is, is a full consultation before that special mining license is issued. And we know Barrick Placer and then Barrick had 30 years of no issue, because they got that process right. And we are very mindful that it is litigious society and you got to do this thing to the book to make sure that we can mine for another 30 years.

Mark, you made a couple of comments about the fundamental outlook of the company being very constructive based on the gold price, based on the growth outlook and then the valuation of the stock where it is. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on using some capital towards the buyback going forward.

Yes. Josh, that is, entertains us, Graham and I almost every day. We have bought back in the past and we -- I think we -- again we don't want to risk our balance sheet right now. We are very well positioned. We have a extremely strong balance sheet. We are forecasting a growth in cash and that'll trigger a net cash position. And as we approach that, the one option which is the preferred option is to buy your stock back. Because we absolutely -- we are completely in agreement with consensus and that is we're trading below what we should be trading and it makes sense to buy. So there's no risk in buying our stock back. It's just how we manage our balance sheet towards that.

One more question. You made a statement about Porgera being a world-class Tier One asset and with some comments about bringing up analyst expectations. Could you maybe remind us what you think the potential economics of this asset look like? Meaning, what's the initial capital to get this to Tier One status and then what the production and cost structure would be?

So, it's a low cost producer, because it's relatively high grade. It's single refractory also autoclave mill, crusher mill, simple process, know it well. If you look at consensus, the valuation is around 6 billion to 7 billion on consensus prices, 5% discount. Graham?

Yes.

And so -- and it's about $1 billion of capital over the next 10 years slightly weight, it's front end loaded. But again, we've got a bit of work to do on that. A lot of it depends on how we treat the Wangima pit, which is not in reserve yet. So I'm talking about total resource now. 10 years we've got banked and that's important for us, because we get to the 50/50 sharing of economics. And our intention is that we will create so much value for everyone. No one else will want to -- the government and Barrick will be partners forever. That's the intention. So, --- and there's a big push back on the Western wall of the main pit that we've going to address. And that's what we busy with at the moment, is designing, doing that. As I say in the press release, we are designing that pushback at the moment. I think that I can say the underground is in better condition than we expected. So we are happy with that. We've had this constant sloughing of the Western wall, which has always been a challenge at Porgera and we need to cut it back and put some remedial work into that wall. The traction is that there's quite a lot of ore on that pushback. And what we hope is that we'll be able to pay for that pushback. And then you've got the Wangima pit, which really brings a whole lot of additional resources into the mine plan and potentially takes it to 20 years, which gives you that big number if you look at it. And we are using -- that's a broad rough valuation on using consensus prices. But the key for us is, but in 10 years we more than get to the sort of 53/47 split, economic split. And remember we sweep all our costs that we've incurred to date from the government equity to equalize. And once we get there, then everyone else benefits. What's important is that the landowners and the province benefit preferentially. So it's carried equity, just to explain. Graham, do you want to add to that?

I think you've done a good job there. I mean the key point, Josh, really is that when you look at our economic interest there and you contrast it to the equity interest, the economic interest is almost double the equity interest because of the way that the cash flow split works. If you compare it to what you would get in a normal situation if you were paying corporate taxes in a 3% royalty. So the combination of that economic splitting of the cash flows combined with what Mark just referred to, which is the sweep of the cash that we've already spent, means that our economic interest is considerably effectively double the value of what the equity interest would imply.

And Josh, this goes back to the Tanzania deal that we made and the point that I've been making all along is the problem of the mining industry is they're go and invest and promise the world and then they don't make the money because they don't deliver on the plan. So the government gets nothing, because all they rely on is taxes. So what we did in Tanzania is we took the economic interest and split it down the middle. We true it up every year. That's a bit complicated, but we do. So the government gets the tax amount, but if we do not pay tax, they still get 50%. So it's a much fairer way of doing it. And again, Papua New Guinea hasn't -- Porgera was a special example. And ironically it paid -- the foreign currency crisis in Papua New Guinea is directly because we're not expecting importing gold from Porgera because it's the big biggest producer and the biggest, the most profitable company in Papua New Guinea. So, that's the same thesis is that, the Prime Minister wanted 51%, which I was very happy to give. I mean, after 30 years, he wanted a different deal. He wanted to make sure that, he could get all his legal taxes and he wanted to participate in the equity, if we delivered on what we planned. And if we didn't, he wanted still half of the production. So that's what we have agreed to do. And it's a great way of doing business, I believe. And one thing, the only risk is, you have to be absolutely convinced you can deliver on your mine, and the models that you shared. And we have done a very similar model in Reko Diq as well, slightly more skewed that Reko Diq is a much bigger asset. But -- and also the government are taking a lot of risk themselves, through this state-owned enterprises, and regearing it with equity, with a global funding package.

With debt?

With debt. Sure. Sorry. We are gearing it with debt. Sorry, not equity, with the global funding package.

Hey, Mark. Lawson Winder from Bank of America. Thank you for the presentation. Nice to see you today and the team. I wanted to touch on reserve replacement. So you spoke to the importance of reserve replacement to the value of Barrick. What is the outlook for this year and which assets do you see driving that outlook?

So Africa will replace all of its gold and copper that it's mining. The one that won't will be LatAm, but it's going to bring a whole lot in with Porgera and Reko Diq that fits in that region. And we have got this new series of projects in around Veladero, and we have got some super exciting projects, Southern Peru in particular, and other parts of South America, which we will share with you in the next quarter or two. Nevada Gold Mines will add about between 50% and 60% of its current -- its this year's production, but then it has a big year next year and the following year. And so that's why what we have said is, there is on a three year rolling average, we will continue to replace on ounces. And we will get Nevada. We are just about there with Nevada like we have in Africa. And again, Lawson, so much so that, we are engaged in conversation because in Randgold, we used to have -- some of our incentives were based on reserve replacement, at least reserve resource replacement. And I believe that's a very good metric in any mining company to remunerate management on. So that's how significant we believe in the importance of organic growth, because it makes -- particularly when you look at -- because we have got really big assets and we now close to have completed the recapitalization, because the Barrick side of our assets were run down, and both sides of Nevada Gold Mine were run down, Barrick side was high graded, the Newmont side was just run down. And we've recapitalized that, we've now got a resource base on the top of that. And so if you add to it, your returns are significant. They become infinite because you are adding ounces on a capital base. And that's the game about big mining assets is if you've got big orebodies and you've built the mine properly, it produces along -- the copper miners are good at that. That's what makes them so valuable.

I wanted to follow up, excuse me, on a comment you made about the value of Barrick's assets, but then the multiple discount in the market. And I mean, I think you make a case here for why the assets are strong, why the assets should be strong going forward with the reserve growth. What is the market missing or has the market missed over the last two years in your view that's led to that discount?

Well, I would start with the fact that perhaps it starts with the analysts and the management and that we haven't had that conversation. And so it's pleasing to see that valuation coming through on a blended consensus basis. So that's a good thing and we -- I'm very mindful, and I said this right in 2019, we had a job to do and you don't build great mining companies easily today, particularly not gold companies. They're tough things to build. I've built one myself and now this is the second. And again, we are mindful that we have to be able to -- I mean, we've always -- I've always been that sort of person I like to support. I like to have an argument as Josh will affirm. But I like to do it on the back of something that's tangible. And I think we rarely are there today. And the first step is, it's very helpful when the analysts group are recognizing value. And it's even more exciting when there's still headroom, which I've just pointed to. And by far, if you look at our performance, what we say, what we do, how we've managed our balance sheet, what we've promised to the market, we've been consistent like we always are. So I don't think there's any doubt in the minds of anyone. Of course, there's some people are a little nervous about where we've gone. They were the same when we went into the DRC. But today, when you look at the portfolio of assets around the world, the risks are very similar, different but similar, or the same. And what we've shown is big assets work, if you pay rent. If they're big enough and they're valuable enough to deliver value to your host country it’s -- and I'm sure Lawson, you've followed United States mining law and the debate in Rosemont and all that. I work as hard with the team in the U.S. as I do in Pakistan and West Africa. And gone are the days where you can run mining companies from a 16-floor office block in the developed world. You have to be out there. And again, getting back to how we manage our reserve resource replacement, and that is we move that ownership out to the mines. We've changed the management to be real business people who lead our minds, and they own those assets. They've got quality geoscientists, processing engineers. It's not -- we don't remote control our business from a central corporate office. We do hold them accountable and we are always there. I always say to the team, if you go off-piste, you start seeing us. If you rarely get off-piste, you see us all the time until we get you back on track. And that's the way we run Barrick.

Sorry. So maybe to follow-up -- sorry, Brian MacArthur, Raymond James. I mean, probably one of your hidden values that you're starting to highlight is the Super Pit. I mean, this thing could be on its own, one of the better copper mines out there in the world. Plus you'd have a gold credit. Does it make sense to be have all the copper in Barrick going forward given how big a good a copper company you're going to have? Second thing without -- you probably can't everything on the PFS, but through to 2060, is that a pretty stable production profile out of the Super Pit? So again, it's basically duration forever?

Big, low grade pit. And what happened is the Chimi pit, it got segregated because people -- Barrick was in a position trying to make money so it dived down and it chased the grade. And it's a challenge to chase grade in a low-grade blended sedimentary-hosted copper deposit. So, -- and what we've done is just go back to geology and there a couple of satellite pits that are genuinely higher grade and lower strip ratio. And the exciting thing about Lumwana is that we run the risk of doing the whole pushback for the Super Pit without going negative cash flow, because we have these satellite pits that can -- so we mine the same strip ratio on a copper waste basis. And so that really -- and that's our team. That's what they -- but once we got the cost down, so we got the cost down right in the beginning. We understood, got to know there's orebodies and that -- and then we looked at the other satellites. Again, a bit like West Africa, they were known in the form of anomalies, but no one had ever stuck a hole in them. So that's what we've been doing. And we're far down the road on that process. So we're confident enough that we've got enough copper in those satellite pits that'll support. Right now we are mining and we're going to hit some higher grade zones in Lumwana pit, Chimi pit now. And at the same time we've replaced the contract miner with a new fleet of Komatsu 100 ton trucks. And we've dropped the cost by $2 a ton. And that is really changing and you can see it in the numbers already in this quarter, this last quarter. And so that -- so we all manage that pit to a point where we've got it open on strike and then that big push back to create the Super Pit, we'll use the satellite pits to do that. We are right in the middle of permitting the new tailings facility. It's largely a negotiation with the tribal chiefdom of the region, which we have had a longstanding relationship with, as far as the authorities go with what support on that.

So if I look at the slide there, 2029, I mean, you have got Jabal Sayid in there, and you have got Zaldívar in there, but you don't have Reko Diq too, right? So you're going to have, like, a…

Yes, we are going to have…

[A 5-year thing at that].

And we are actively hunting in the main copper belts. We are in the -- all the copper belts of the United States. And let me tell you there is some significant opportunities still within the U.S., as I showed in that slide broadly. And so we are -- and again, we believe that, if you believe in the numbers, which I have always worked on. The U.S. is going to have to change the way it manages mining. And we have taken that bet, to get out there ahead of the -- and again, we are the biggest miners in the United States already. And we are probably the biggest explorer, sorry, I stepped out of the box. We probably -- okay. We are probably the biggest explorer right now in the U.S. as well.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Operator, we pass it back to you for any questions from the call-ins.

Certainly. [Operator Instructions] The first question comes from Cleve Rueckert with UBS. Please go ahead.

Can you hear me okay?

Yes. Perfectly, Cleve.

Excellent. Thanks, Mark. We have had a little bit of technical difficulties online. So I apologize if the question is redundant. But I think in the prepared materials, you called out Cortez, PV and Turquoise Ridge as some of the assets where there was some maintenance, there was some investment done in the first half, and then you expect that increased production run rate into the second half. I had a similar question last quarter. Do you expect that second half run rate to continue into 2024? Like have you done the bulk of the kind of bigger work that you need to do with those mines in order to sustain production at that second half run rate?

Absolutely. And, look, let me just take one at a time. So the Cortez maintenance is really development and the -- it's not really actual like processing maintenance. Turquoise Ridge was a premature hotspot on one of the autoclaves, and we brought it forward. It was going to be in quarter three normal planned maintenance. Again, we brought it forward. We changed a lot. We used the opportunity to change a whole lot of gear pumps and tied it up. We have got quite a bit of work to do to get Turquoise Ridge to where we want it to be. The roaster maintenance was a big maintenance, scheduled maintenance on the Goldstrike roaster. More importantly, it was the shutdown on the Gold Quarry roaster and also we used that shutdown to tie in on the expansion project. So we got one more shutdown to do next year. I think it's second quarter scheduled for and we'll finish the expansion of the Gold Quarry roaster. So not only do we maintain the run rate, we lift our throughput capacity in the Gold Quarry roaster by between 15% and 20%. And so we bring down the costs and so we add production capacity, because right now Nevada Gold Mines is constrained on double refractory ore processing capacity. We've spent a lot of time on planned maintenance to the point that a lot of the planned maintenance was planned, because it was neglected. And so we are getting back to a proper plan maintenance, which is scheduled maintenance, which is a normal course of business, which is baked into our forecast anyway. So, but to answer your question in simple words, yes, you'll see the throughput maintained at a higher rate, largely because we add more capacity next year.

And then one, just quick follow-up. The Goldrush Record of Decision is something that continues to come up in sort of our conversations. And I see that you're expecting it now, I think in Q4. But there was also a little bit of discussion around some modifications to the BLM. I'm wondering if that Record of Decision is restricting development there at all, or if these small modifications are allowing sort of timely development to continue?

So on the development side, we are continuing. It does start impeding production, because we need to get ventilation up ahead of where we are. And so if it queries on much further, it'll impact production. We've guided that we are looking at the specific impacts. At this stage, this is all about Rosemont and Department of Interior and we've been engaged with them all the time. And again this issue about permitting unmineralized claims and the fact that there are two things. Goldrush doesn't need a tailings dam. It's mineralized everywhere underneath and where we are working. It's got a very small footprint because we are using already permitted infrastructure. So it doesn't fit in even if you wanted to, you can't put it into a sort of Rosemont argument. And it's taken a little while for us to get BLM, the state and particularly the federal part of it to clear it. So they have cleared it now. So that's why we are pointing to a specific time period. But it's a little bit like Porgera, we are talking all the time and we are working towards it. We have got permission to extend the development under the exploration permit in Goldrush. So, we can run into next year and still get the flexibility in place, but we need -- as soon we start having to put the raisebores up to get the ventilation cleared to be able to ramp up the ore production. So that's really where we are. And every indication is now that it's been cleared to finalize the EIS the first step and then that goes to the -- once that's finalized, the Record of Decision follows shortly. And so that's why we've got. And we make these forecasts in conversation with our local BLM team.

The next question comes from Alan Spence with BNP Paribas Exane.

I've got two and I'll just take them one at a time. The first one on Turquoise Ridge, there's some unplanned maintenance events in the underground. Can you just expand on what that was and if that's carried into the third quarter?

Yes, so, we had a fall of ground in part of the development in Turquoise Ridge which we -- again, it's part of our design and changing the design, which we had to step back and deal with. We had a further shutdown on the shaft on some of the safety arrangements in the shaft that we needed to fix. And we did that. The main impact was really the autoclave hotspot, which we had to take the autoclave down and fix it. We were scheduled to do that as I said in quarter three. We brought it forward. So, on balance across the year it doesn't impact on our production. That's really the most important of the unplanned maintenance. It was planned, but not then.

And then one probably for Graham, just could you talk a little bit about cost expectations into the second half, how you've seen the development of labor, consumables and...?

So can you hear us?

Okay, I think he went back.

Yes, back, yes. So you wanted to know about inflation and our outlook on that?

Yes, into the second half, please.

So I'll answer. Graham has got a technical challenge here. So we certainly see costs flattening off. Some sort of softening a little bit. We are forecasting a sticky sort of inflation where around where it is today. We have some higher costs, which are still Ukraine-related, ammonium and cyanide and things like that. The big driver is in the second half is increased production will bring down our costs, as I pointed out in our guidance. And we do believe that the cost will come down, but not all the way down in the short-term. And that's the way we are managing. But there's -- as you -- I will tell you from years of experience, hit your numbers on the production, costs always look better. We are certainly not facing inflationary costs right now. We have got a couple, but we have got some plans. Like, we are much more able to manage the costs and logistics in AME. The U.S. has got restrictions on imports and other tariffs and so on. So we manage that differently. But, I think I don't know, Graham, now that you have got the mic.

I think you have got it covered there, Mark. I mean, in terms of the inputs, we are comfortable with the assumptions that we were using for 2023. There's some swings in roundabouts. But generally, we are in line. So the costs are expected to come down in the second half as the production ramps up. And yes, that's how we get down there. The other point just to reiterate is that our cost guidance is obviously based on a gold price assumption in 2023, we were using $1,650, and we have also guided that for every $100 change in the gold price that has about a $5 impact on our cost per ounces. So based on where we are at the moment, that's about $15 of additional costs compared to the base case assumptions. So I think that's important to take into consideration as well.

All right. Thanks guys. The audio managed to come back at the end. I missed most of that, but I will read the transcript for your full description. Thanks.

Okay. Sorry about that.

The next question comes from Lici Wu with Haitong International Securities. Please go ahead.

Hi, Mark. I'm Lisa from Haitong International Securities. And I have two more questions. The first one is about the Porgera project. How -- are I guess the tax issues taken by Barrick or jointly with Zijin Mining?

So, jointly with Zijin Mining, so we split at 60/40. So there was some -- it was a negotiated settlement. So it was quite a tough thing to sort of assign. But we work very closely with Zijin and Chairman Chen and myself sat down and worked through and allocated some to the Barrick past, because the settlement included all the way to the new Porgera start-up. So we didn't leave any residual tax assessments behind. We cleared the whole thing. And so there was some tax that was future based, some tax that was specific to the assessment, which was done just before they closed the mine. And then some related to the past before Zijin was part of the project. So we worked through that and basically settled, as per the down to us on a 60/40 basis. So we shared the tax.

Got it. Thank you. And my second question is, I noticed that our future focus will be on copper. And currently, many copper mining companies has encountered many problems such as declining grade and water shortage. Will we encounter the problem of increasing copper costs in the future? Thank you.

So the one thing -- that's a very important point you make, and that is a lot of the copper produced today is from old mines, which started out as new mines, decades ago, like 50 years ago. And so that is a challenge and of course if you're talking Chile, water has become a big issue in Chile and the copper mining. On the assets that we've got, we are in a better league because of grades generally. Reko Diq comes with gold, which makes it more attractive and blends the risk of it. And on the water aspect on Reko Diq, that's one of the critical deliverables on our feasibility study, and we are very focused on that. As I said, we're going to be doing the first real in-depth water study for that whole part of Pakistan/Balochistan. But the work that we've already done, we're comfortable that certainly for the first 10 years we can draw water without impacting those aquifers, and there's a lot more that we've sort of certainly can point to at this stage, but it needs a lot of work. Ultimately, there are further options. I mean, as that area, that whole Tethyan metalliferous belts gets developed, this is going to be a region where infrastructure and particularly desalination is going to have to be part of the bigger developments going forward.

The next question comes from Anita Soni with CIBC World Markets.

So I just have one left and I think it's about PV and my apologies for the background noise here. But I had the opportunity to visit the asset three months ago, and it's definitely an impressive asset. But you were just talking about some issues that you were having with some of FLSmidth pieces of equipment. Can you talk about how you see that evolving in Q3? And I know you said you would be ramped up in Q4, but can you tell us about how it's going this quarter and what we should be expecting in terms of throughput for this quarter?

So, Anita, you would imagine everyone's in PV, John Steele, all our engineers from other parts of the world, who are commissioning experts are FLSmidth subject matter experts. This is a new piece of equipment. And we've had challenges with the shafts and the gear boxes. We have replaced them already. We are re-engineering some of the design issues out as we speak and manufacturing some additional pieces of equipment, so we've got back up. So we're working on it. I mean, for me, I don't have a feel right now because these sort of startups, they can happen in a flash or you can work them out over a couple of weeks. So -- but we are waiting for a final plan, actual schedule of how we're going to get them back to. So we've got an -- we are able to engineer and replace parts and engineer little pieces on, and that'll get them running. But we need to get this thing to full capacity. And you know, it would be remiss of me to not point out that this is a big asset that's going to run for 20 plus years. We are dealing with it. Certainly when I sit with the team and I've just come from there, we're still going to have a substantially better second half than first half at PV. And as of today we are still planning to be within guidance.

The next question comes from Tanya Jakusconek with Scotiabank.

Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for taking my questions and I apologize if this has already been said, but there's a lot of technical issues on this call today. Just wanted to circle back to Porgera if I could. Just want to confirm that, Mark, what you said was that we're just waiting for the Special Mining License that's on the critical path for us to start up. And I just wanted to confirm that you said that local communities have all signed off. Are those two comments correct?

So we are waiting for the special mining lease, which is the same thing effectively. But that's what it's termed. And the landowners agreement, as you know, we disclosed that way back when there was this conflict between us and government. The landowners were aligned with us and reinforcing the importance of Porgera and getting it back online. So the equity split is 10% to landowners of which 2.5% go to what we call the LMP landowners and 7.5% to the SML landowners, the main owners of the land on which the mine operates. And 5% goes to the Enga Province. And that's the split. Of course, the conversation in the development forum evolves around that. And also other contracts that are always in place, like the people living down the river, people on other concessions like Dolomite concessions and other various concessions that we work with. And all of that is part of that. And of course, the government is also committed to investing back into Porgera and the Porgera Valley like schooling, and we've been talking about some tax offsets even because there's a real realization how significant Porgera is to the economy of Papua New Guinea. So the answer is yes and no, because this is a process. Of course there's always a fallback because we have agreements, but this is a process of consultation, which is prescribed by the law, and the first one is the warden's hearing. And that is really defined for the government through the warden in the MRA to -- Mineral Resource Authority or the Mining Department to sit and listen to all interested and affected parties, and have their issues, proposals, whatever, and record them. And that is an obligation. And then following that the development forum, which is more of an proper engagement, and it doesn't have to be completed straight away. But once the process is far enough advanced, the government will make the decision at a point in time on issuing the SML.

Okay. And when we get this SML? Can we still assume a six month ramp-up? Is that still the case for this mine to get to full capacity?

Yes. I think that once we move on to the site, six months is a good target here. We will of course, produce gold before that. But getting it ramped up, that's a good assumption.

And should I still be envisioning this mine to produce on a 100% basis about 500,000 ounces at total cash cost of 900 and all-in sustaining cost of 1,200, is that still a reasonable number?

That's a fair guess at this stage. We will update it as we go.

I think, Tanya, once we are up and running, we will share some updated numbers with you.

And once we get the start-up plan, which is what we are working on, we will guide you. But, we have got those guidance out, and they will stick until we change them. And the ramp up is -- it goes ahead of that. So you working on 500 as a first crack is reasonable, on a 100% basis. Of course, it goes a lot higher than that within a couple of years.

Okay. Alright. I'll wait for that new mine plan, which would that be coming once we get this up? Would it be reasonable to assume, hopefully, like, with your guidance and...

Yes. We will give it to you when we announce that we are actually properly starting up the mine. I've got, Graham here, I'm trying to sort of dodge the bullet.

I think, Tanya, I think, all things going according to plan. February when we do our normal annual guidance is probably the best guess.

Okay. No. Thanks for that, Graham. And just on the reserve replacement, because, again, of technical issues. I just wanted to understand, as a company overall, did I correctly understand that this year, we would likely see more increases to resources and not necessarily reserves. Was that a fair statement?

That is correct. Yes.

And that reserve replacement you can see occurring in Africa on both gold and copper and not in LatAm. Was that also a [fair statement]?

That's correct. But you will see that rolling up next year.

All right. So that's helpful. And then just lastly, just on the overall resources for the company, with that have been an increase in gold and copper for both?

Yes. It's mined copper and gold. You are talking about the last second to last slide.

Yes. Okay, now that's perfect. Thank you so much.

Our final question comes from Martin Pradier with Veritas Investment Research.

I have two questions. The first one on Lumwana, can you maintain -- are you talking about much high grading in second half compared to Q2? Can you give us some idea of what you mean in terms of higher grade in second half?

Look, higher grade in Lumwana is low grade anywhere else. So it's not a lot, but it's more consistent and slightly higher grade. I mean I can actually…

Compared to Q2, are we talking 10% or 15% higher in the second half?

Sort of 10% is a good number.

And in Kibali, you had a good recovery. Can you maintain or improve production in second half compared to Q2?

We've got a good second half for Kibali, it's good overall. The second half…

Yes. It's really consistent with quarter two. So that's the kind of run rate that we expect for the rest of the year.

There are no more questions from the conference call.

Thank you very much. Thanks, ladies and gentlemen, those of you are here. I think we would like to invite you for a snack and a glass of wine we thought. We'd break the tradition here, new Barrick. So join us. Thank you, everyone

This concludes today's event. Should you have additional questions [Audio Gap] and have a pleasant day.