Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to B2Gold Corp’s First Quarter 2019 Financial Results Conference Call. I’d now like to turn the call over to Mr. Clive Johnson, President and CEO. You may proceed, Mr. Johnson.

Thanks, operator. Welcome everyone to the conference call to discuss the 2019 first quarter results for – financial results for B2Gold. We had another strong quarter, and I’m going to hand over to Mike in a minute; Mike Cinnamond, our CFO to give us a run through of the highlights. I think the news release is quite thorough and self explanatory, it’s backed up by MD&A that we filed as well, so there’s lots of information there, so I’m going to keep it short and sweet. Mike will give us a run through of the financial results, and then we’re going to quickly turn it over to questions after that to see if we can answer any of your questions. With the quarter and going forward, we continue to remain focused on maximizing our operations around the world. We are very focused on continuing to generate free cash flow. We’re looking at another very good year this year as Mike will outline as well in terms of our guidance for the year. We’re also very focused on debt repayment. It’s an important part where we continued after last year repaying $220 million of debt last year to have – reduced our debt significantly and we’ll continue on that path as well. When we look to the future, we’re very focused on our pipeline. I think we’ve talked about it a little bit before. In the pipeline, some of it’s pretty immediate. One is, of course, the expansion of Fekola, which is underway. We expect to kick in next year. But given our view of the preliminary economic assessment that we filed, we think that it is going to make a significant increase in production and we talked about averaging 550,000 ounces a year for five years starting next year, but…

Thanks, Clive.

Is that clear?

I think that was fairly clear. A quick – I’ll walk you through the revenues and the operating results and then some comments, I guess, on some elements of the cash flow statement. So first on the revenue side. In the quarter, we reported $302 million in revenues on sales of 232,000 ounces, also about $42 million less than the prior year quarter. And the main reason for that is as we sold 28,000 fewer ounces, but we have to just want to remind you that in the prior year quarter Q1 2018, that’s the quarter when we sold down more than 20,000 ounces of low costs of Fekola. And between that, we built up in the Fekola ramp-up stage, so that wasn’t opening inventory at the end of 2017, which was sort of one-off as we brought Fekola online. So still a very strong sales quarter for us this year. And just there was a sort of one-off explanation for last year’s even higher quarter. On the production side, consolidated production was 231,000 ounces, which beat budget of 218,000 ounces by 13,000 ounces and this continues to reflect the outperformance of Fekola and Masbate. Otjikoto was slightly up and then in Nicaragua, El Limon was basically on budget and Libertad by about 3,000 ounces. Looking at individually, Fekola had a production of about 110,000 ounces, beat budget by 7,700. That was due to higher throughput. During the period, we processed a fair amount of weathered saprolite that requires less grinding. And because the mill throughput was doing so well, we also made a decision in the quarter to process more of our low-grade stockpiles than we originally budgeted. Because the low-grade stockpiles were lower grade, overall our grade was slightly down. The average grade for the quarter was 2.1…

Okay. Thanks, Mike. We’ll open up to questions now.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] And your first question comes from Carey MacRury from Canaccord. Carey, your line is open.

Hi, good morning. Just had a question on Fekola. In Q1, you had throughput of about 6.9 million tonnes annualized. And I know your guidance for the year is 5.75 million tonnes. Just wondering how we should think about throughput this year? I mean, obviously, the plants can do well about nameplates. Any color you can provide on that?

Bill?

Yes, well, we’ve always said that if we have some of the softer material that we can run more for sure. What we are saying is that our base case is 6 million tonnes per annum based on grinding sites on the harder ore that we found at Fekola. So I would say, if we continue to find the softer ore, which we’re in, then you can expect that we’ll be up higher than 6 million tonnes.

In future, we expect to get into some harder ore.

Yes.

And what’s the mix roughly of soft to hard currently?

Well, Mike talked a little bit about that for sure. I mean, in Q1, we were running, what, was it 9% – 12% saprolite and some of the other stuff was higher up, up in the dome. So we didn’t see much hard stuff in Q1.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks.

And your next question comes from Chris Thompson of PI Financial. Chris, your line is open.

All right, thanks a lot. Good morning, guys, congratulations on a great quarter. Just – and by the way thanks for all the detail on the M&A, really appreciate that. Two quick questions. First one on Masbate. Second one on Otjikoto. Obviously, great results from Masbate. Obviously, you beat on grade and oxide tonnage. Can we expect any more juice in the tank by way of oxide ore before the mine reverts back to, let’s call it, a normal transition fresh oxide mill mix?

Bill?

Yes, as we continue, we see – foresee in this quarter continuing on a similar mix. So this quarter, I think you will see continued positive results reverting to as planned by Q3 of this year.

Okay. And thanks for that. And then, finally, Otjikoto. Obviously, you’re expecting, back-half weighted, obviously more production, I guess, in the back half, higher grade, it looks like from Wolfshag 2 Pits, Phase 2 there. What are you guys thinking about the underground potential? Is that something you’re still evaluating there?

The answer is absolutely, yes. As a matter of fact, if you remember, the long kind of drawn-out saga that we had last year, it was almost a – it was a push on the economics open pit versus underground, and a lot of that really depended on the geotech that we had felt was going to be there and the geohydrology. Those studies have now come in much more positive than we anticipated. And so we are now thinking that we will go underground there for sure, and we may go underground sooner than later. The current plan is to develop our study by the end of Q3, so we can present it for the Board in Q4 of this year. And obviously, we’ll report our life of mines next year and we’ll come out.

Great. Thanks, Bill. Thanks, guys.

Great. Thanks, Chris. I appreciate it.

[Operator Instructions] And your next question comes from Alvin Islam of Haywood Securities. Alvin, your line is open.

Hi, good afternoon, guys. Congrats on a good quarter. Just two questions on Fekola, if I may. Given the higher run rate at Fekola, are you guys noticing any benefits on any particular fixed cost items?

John, you want to…

Yes, I think we’re seeing lower costs per tonne processed with the softer ore because of the higher divisor with the – that goes along with the higher throughput, less reagent consumptions because of the nature of the ore – the oxide nature of the ore as well. So yes, we’re seeing cost reductions from it.

And last one, if I may. How sensitive are you guys to fuel cost variations at Fekola?

Well, fuel overall for Fekola is about 30% of our production costs, and that’s kind of split half-and-half between the fleet and the mill, really. So that gives you an idea of the quantum of fuel and the overall production mix.

Okay. Thanks, guys.

Yes. And one of the things we are looking at in conjunction with that, similar to Otjikoto, we are undertaking right now a solar study to put in a solar plant, and those results are coming out, they’re imminent. And we anticipate, probably in the next little bit, to announce what amount we would switch over to at least some of the power plant being on solar.

We’re feeling quite positive about that so far.

Your next question comes from Lawson Winder from BoA Merrill. Lawson, your line is open.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my call. I just wanted to ask about Jabali Antenna. Obviously, you’ve made progress there, sort of positive progress. But I mean you still need a resettlement and then ultimately, you still need the final permit. I mean, my thinking is and correct me if I’m wrong, that the permit is probably going to be easier than the resettlement, but does one depend on the other? And then what gives you confidence that the resettlement will ultimately happen in time for H2? And where is that right now? Thanks.

Mike?

Yes. Resettlement is down to the pointy end. So we’ve made some good advances there. That’s the only impediment as you indicated. Yes, the permit. We’ve gone through the public consultation process, and we’re in good order there. So given our advances on resettlement, we’re pretty confident looking at the H2, that we’ll be there happily in time.

And then just on Gramalote. In your most recent release prior to the Q1 results out last night, I mean, you basically mentioned that before making decisions that you would complete an internal PEA on Gramalote. So I’m just curious. I mean, was that completed? And then if you do ultimately decide or when you decide to increase the budget for Gramalote? Will you be releasing those results of the PEA, just sort of the outline – sort of a justification for that investment? And then anything on time line around that investment decision will be helpful as well. Thanks.

Yes, I mean, we don’t really know the way forward right now with Gramalote. Let’s say we are in discussions with AGA, our partner. We’ve a new model there now, and so much better model than it was before than the new model that AGA used in their – what they called the pre-feasibility study in 2017. So we were always of the view that there was issues on the model and we need more drilling. And now there’s been a meeting in the minds that we need more drilling. So the question now is there is – the new model has some much better economics, but the key to that is we’ll need more drilling to make it indicated, and ultimately, that should become reserves, it’s economics. So that’s the conversations going on now. So the question is who wants to spend more money in Gramalote? If so, how much? Who is going to spend it? And the next step would be bunch of drilling. Gramalote has had a lot of engineering. Whether AGA’s direction as operator, there’s been huge amounts of money spent, probably should have been a little more drilling. But there’s been huge amounts of money spent, so the metallurgy is in great shape, the engineering is in great shape. We have a permit in hand, and we’re going to keep the permit going, that’s part of the process. But it’s got a lot of things going for it. Low grade, yes, but low strip ratio, but very attractive metallurgy, et cetera, et cetera. So all of a sudden, there may be some new life in Gramalote based on our new model, but the key will be who wants to do what going forward, and ultimately, what does the new model mean. It needs more drilling for sure. So we are moving within a month – are moving in a month, and we’re going have – be able to have reached an agreement one way or the other with our partner.

Okay, thank you. That’s great. And then just how do you think about the 49% interest at this point? I mean, do have a preference one way or another whether you like to see your interest stay the same, increase or decrease?

The unusual thing about the joint venture agreement at Gramalote is the fact that 49% is basically effectively 50-50. All the powers you would normally see in a 50-50 joint venture but all the things you have to unanimously agree are in this joint venture whether you own 49% or 35%, frankly. It’s an unusual agreement in that regard. So the 49% is very powerful in that sense. So we’re not really stuck on percentages a whole lot. We’re keen to be operator. If that’s something our partner wants us to do, we’ll seriously consider.

Okay, great. And then, Mike, sorry, I don’t think I heard the numbers that you gave for the Fekola tax makeup, so both the tax installment and the priority dividend. Did you give the amount that was in Q1? And then I think you gave the amount that was expected for Q2. Just I apologize, I missed it.

Well, what’s in the actual current income tax charge is $18 million for Fekola, $14 million for current income taxes and $4 million for the priority dividends, so that’s on an accruals basis in the P&L. What was physically paid in cash during the quarter, Fekola was $6 million and Fekola tax installment, but subsequent to the quarter end, we paid another $30 million to settle out our final 2018 tax liability for Fekola. We’re also expecting to pay $17 million in Q2 to settle the 2018 priority dividend.

Got you. Okay, that’s great. Thanks. That’s all from me guys. Thank you.

Thanks.

And your next question comes from Craig Stanley of Eight Capital. Craig, your line is open.

Thank you. You mentioned that you increased the revolver because you get better terms. Can you give us an idea of just what the terms are or just maybe how much you might save per year?

That’s probably got some details in the MD&A, but Mike, do you want to have it?

We haven’t fully closed it yet, so we didn’t disclose the details, but we will when we close it, which is expected very shortly. I can say the pricing is generally a little better than it was and less onerous on the covenants. And the thing we’d probably focus on the most is just the baskets of what carve-outs that you can have, but I think we’ll disclose a bit more on that when we actually close it. We’re almost there.

Second quarter.

Second quarter.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks.

And we have no further questions at this time. So I’ll turn it back over to Mr. Johnson for closing remarks.

Okay. Thanks for your time, everyone. Have a good day.