Good day, and welcome to the Coeur Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. [Operator Instructions]. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference to Courtney Lynn. Please go ahead.

Thank you, and good morning. Welcome to Coeur Mining's First Quarter Earnings Conference Call. Our results were released after yesterday's market close, and a copy of the press release and slides for today's call are available on our website. Before we get started, I would like to remind everyone on that our press release and some of our comments on the call include forward-looking statements from which actual results may differ. In addition, we recently completed the sale of our Bolivian subsidiary. Because of this, we have presented San Bartolomé as a discontinued operation and excluded it from any consolidated operating metric or financial results discussed unless otherwise noted. Please review the cautionary statements included in our press release and presentation as well as the Risk factors described in our latest 10-Q and 10-K. I'll now turn it over to Mitch Krebs, President and Chief Executive Officer.

Thanks, Courtney, and good morning, everybody. Thanks for joining our first quarter earnings call. We're off to a good start and are well on track to deliver a solid year in 2018. Yesterday afternoon, we reported quarterly revenue of $163 million and net income of $1 million. Adjusted EBITDA was $50 million and free cash flow was negative $27 million. Capital expenditures totaled $42 million, which was about 80% higher year-over-year and reflects the higher level of investment at Silvertip during the quarter. We also saw timing-related working capital items increase by $18 million during the first three months of the year. The standout performer for us was Palmarejo once again. It silver production was 31% higher, free cash flow total $18 million and costs were below $7 per silver equivalent ounce for the second consecutive quarter. Just three years ago, Palmarejo costs were $13.52 per equivalent ounce, nearly 2x higher than they were in the first quarter, and that was back when we were in the still initial of transitioning the operation to underground mining at Guadalupe and Independencia. Mining at Independencia continued in a high-grade zone during the quarter that we have conservatively modeled. This area requires extra ground support which is why mining rates were lower. As we move away from the primary stopes in this faulty zone, mining rates have started to increase and grades have started to decline slightly. We expect to see a small increase in grades again later in the year when remind the secondary stopes in this zone. Palmarejo's production levels are also expected to benefit from a new on-site ADR plant we anticipate commissioning by month end. This ADR plant is a great example of the kind of incremental investment opportunities we're always seeking at our existing operations. It had the…

[Operator Instructions]. The first question comes from Joseph Reagor with Roth Capital.

First thing, you mention the impact of diesel prices being higher. I think the that day we reached -- three-year high the first time backing 70 bucks for a long time for oil here in the U.S. With your cost guidance and the impact that in Q1, if diesel prices remain at this level, is there any risk that your guidance for the year might have to be revised in the future?

Good question. I think you'll note the actual costs at our mines relative to the guidance ranges that we put out for the full year, were tracking pretty well, kind of low and if not below the low-end. So I think we feel good that we have enough buffer built in to accommodate a sustained higher oil/diesel price. A couple of operations are no budgeted for an unexpected higher diesel price throughout the year. So a little bit of it is already kind of baked into our guidance. So, I think, will get to the midpoint of the year and see where we are, but at this point we feel actually really good where we were trending relative to our full year cost guidance.

Okay. And then moving to Silvertip, anymore you can give us as far as how things going there? Maybe anything about the timing of when commercial production should be achieved that way we can account for the initial production properly on an income statement or cash flow basis?

Yes. Let me start with Frank, and then to the extent, Peter, you want to fill in any of the accounting we can hit that too. Frank, you want to give Joe a quick update on how things are going on at Silvertip?

Sure, will do. This is Frank. Joe, things are going quite up we're commissioning both mine and process facility. The challenges that we've started with the mind that have very little open whitespace, received a backfill material. So as we mine and ship quarter of the mill, we processed lot of the minerals that come under that process, non-concentrates materials have to go back underground to backfill the areas. So the real challenge is going to be the next few months, may getting to an optimal balance between the mine and the process Things are going well. We're starting like zero-based, as I said, but things are progressing as we have planned. We have been able to achieve at this point in time, the mill throughput that we talked thought where we are at this point. We're averaging in the neighborhood of 300 tons per day. Now we expect to get to the point where we would declare commercial production, roughly midyear, loosely defined as we're at a stable processing rate of 60% to 80% of the nameplate capacity that we intend to achieve this year, which is 750 tons per day by the end of the year, will move up to 1,000 tons per day early next year. So we're looking for that to happen around midyear. At this point, things remain on track for that.

Okay. And then Peter, on the accounting side?

Yes. I think Frank provided a definition, Joe, the accounting before commercial production in the interim proceeds, costs, et cetera. We'll continue to run through free development, reclamation and the other on the income statement subsequent to declaring commercial production. And it will, obviously, this year, typical revenue accounting for the income led concentrate sales.

Our next question comes from Mark Reichman with NOBLE Capital markets.

Just a couple of questions. First on Kensington, I know the improvement of performance is expected in the back half of the year, and I was wondering if you can just talk a little bit more about that in terms of the average gold grades? Would you expect those to be pretty much in line with what was experienced in the fourth quarter of '17, the 0.22 level? Or will they be slightly lower than that as reflected in the PEA? And then what might you expect in terms of uptake in production?

Yes. It's Mitch here. I'll take the crack at and then Frank. We have Terry Smith too, who is our VP of our North American operations who will provide other color. But I would say the fourth quarter of last year is where we is something that we hope to achieve again and sustain starting at some point next year. Once we get into Jualin later this year and get that high-grade ore coming into mill on a sustained basis. I think you should look at this year as being more of a kind of an ounces per ton basis kind of 0.19 to 0.20 throughout the balance of 2018 [indiscernible].

Yes. And then production, you pretty much in terms of tons mill in production, not much of too much of a change there in terms of upside in the second half?

I'd say, the full year guidance of Kensington of 115,000 to 120,000 ounces, we still good with. But that does assume a bit more of that comes kind of third quarter and then more so fourth quarter, but not quite up to that fourth quarter of 2017 level.

Okay. And then capital expenditures, you know, for the full year, they were kind of anticipating $120 million to $140 millionth in the first quarter with kind of a little over $42 million. And I was just wondering, if you could just may be address kind of how those capital expenditures are spent in over the ensuing three quarters? Are they backend loaded? Or and then also -- not really related, but on the Silvertip, I know that there is that $25 million payment that is tied to the receipt of the permit, I was just curious whether that would be paid kind of fourth quarter? Or whether that would be a first quarter 2019 event?

Yes, sure. I'll give you some thoughts on CapEx, overall. It is kind of a front-loaded year for us. And the majority of the reason for that is, as you would expect Silvertip. And so each quarter I think throughout the year you'll see a slight decline in our overall CapEx. But as you just think kind of mine by mine really quick, Palmarejo and Kensington which are a 200-ground mines and heavy amount of just underground capitalized development, those are pretty steady states. And there is a little bit more capital at Rochester in the fourth quarter tied to that HPGR installation. But, overall, CapEx there at Rochester, like I mentioned, is going to be somewhere between $7 million and $15 million for the full year -- Wharf has very little capital at all. And so that the real thing that tilted to the front half of the year is really the -- that the CapEx of Silvertip. And then in terms of that, payment due to the sellers of Silvertip, that's tied to the receipt of that permit amendment. I think, the terms of the deal stipulate that, that payment is due 15 business days after we receive that from the regulators. So right now, I think, we said in my prepared comments, around year-end, whether that's this side of year-end or slightly the other side of year-end, we'll just have to see. But then shortly after that, that money goes out. So we'll see when that actually hits.

Okay. And then just last question, just on the -- just want to understand a little better with regard to the Mexican tax -- cash taxes related to Palmarejo. I think on the fourth quarter call, you said, you kind of expect $35 million of which -- $35-plus million of which about half of that would be due in Q1. And now, we're having $40 million to $45 million, zero was kind of incorporated in Q1, but can we expect $30 million to $35 million in Q2. I was just curious if they could just have a talk address the timing those payments in a little more detail and kind of the change in expectations?

Sure. I would say, it's Peter Mitchell. The reference to the '17, and that was actually paid on April 2nd, March 31st which is Saturday. So it was already accrued at year-end, but ultimately, paid in compliance with Mexican law in -- at the very beginning of April, that was $70 million. And then $40 million to $45 million that were kind of guiding to for total cash, outlay for 2018, is really just a function of -- we're updating our forecast on a quarterly basis and -- pending cash tax liability in Mexico is a function of that latest forecast, so you're correct that moved up a little bit since our last conference call, but that's our expectation--

And that was Palmarejo's strong performance relative to

The next question comes from Kyle Blendon with Goldman

On for Kyle Blendon [indiscernible] So are you guys seeing any other attractive asset [indiscernible] And what is in your M&A pipeline at this point?

Yes. We always trying to improve the quality of our asset that we operate. And so we're always evaluating those. We have, I think, some pretty good discipline building now to our evaluation process, driven really by the geographic footprint that we are focused on in terms of the Mexico, U.S. and Canada. So anything that we find that can make the company a better company in terms of margin, mine life, cash flow, accretion on a per share basis, rate of return, we kind of look to ourselves and our stockholders to evaluate those. And so we're always evaluating things. And I'd say the opportunity set out there is not huge, but it helps to have some pretty defined filters, so that their only focusing on the right things. We're looking at both existing current producing the cash flowing assets. We're focused on growing and enhancing our pipeline of future growth, really all driven by the underlying our overarching premise of quality over quantity. We're not trying to get bigger for the sake of getting bigger, we're trying to get bigger. And if there are assets that can help us accomplish that, we'll roll up our sleeves and take a good hard look at it.

The next question comes from Chiu Cosmos with CIBC.

I guess, today. It's Cosmos here. Few questions, may be first off -- yes?

You got a new nickname.

Hopefully, maybe first off on CapEx, Mitch, you talk quite a bit about CapEx, but I just want to put numbers to it. So it was higher I think in Q1, $42.3 million in terms of total CapEx. But given that you've maintained your full year guidance of $120 million, $140 million in terms of CapEx. Simple math, so I can just work it out, pack out what happened in Q1 divided by 3, that should be the average run rate in terms of what I should be expecting for CapEx for the rest of 2018?

I'd say if you picked a number in our CapEx guidance range of the one -- the midpoint say $130 million, you would see kind of on a 2/3s 1/3 split. 2/3 of that will be the first half of the year, 1/3 in the back half of the year.

Okay. Yes, I just want to make sure I'm comparing apples-to-apples and making sure those numbers I'm picking out of the -- income statement there as comparable to what you have in the in your guidance?

Yes. Okay.

Yes. And then in terms of the Rochester here, just wondering to confirm, Mitch, have you made a go-ahead decision on high-pressure grinding rules? It's just unclear previously in March with the tech reported kind of said our decision to perceive with the scope mine plant has not yet been made. And Coeur expects to evaluating optimize at HPGR expects to make a development decision by early 2019. But from the literature since then and discussions today, it seems like you've -- have you made the go-ahead decision?

Yes. The board approval, the units ordered, and we're getting ready for decommissioning of that what we call the inpit crusher at the end of the year, and this HPGR unit on to the what we call ex-pit crusher. And we're starting to see those benefits then overtime in 2019, but really starting in the second quarter.

Okay. Got you. I just wanted to confirm. But and then in terms of switching gears a little bit, going back to Silvertip here, in terms of getting right now you're about 300 tons per day, I believe, in April. You're trying to get apples 750 tons per day -- metric tons per day by the end of 2018. Is it, I guess, Frank sort of talked about that, but is it sort of just opening up more working faces? More stops? And then is that really what you need to do? And do have enough equipment as you open up more stops?

Frank, you want to answer Cosmos' question?

Sure. Well, Cosmos, you're pretty close there. As we developed mind further and opening up more mining areas, we'll produce more tense from the mine and then does go through the process facility. As I mentioned, we kind of started out at a 0 basis with the mine needed to have development begin. So that ramp up really ties to that. So we're looking at a nominal getting to about half of what we're targeting by early next year, by the end of the -- by midyear this year. And then in the second half get an additional 250 tons per day out of the mine. And then in the first quarter of 2019 get up to that 1,000. This is it's about growing the mine and then getting the mine in the process balanced with the common point being material.

And getting into too much material here, but how many levels of mining at today? How many open stops do you have today? And how many do you actually need to get up to like 750 tons per day? And what are you kind of targeting?

Well, not very many, that's a pretty short answer. This is compact small mine pretty good size shapes that we're working with. So to come up with 500 to even a 1000 tons per day may ultimately require about 1 or 2 -- well, 2 rounds of a blasting per day. This is a pretty compact mine with very rich material in every stope that we develop, so it's really nice.

And then maybe the last thing on Silvertip. I see that you spent $18.6 million in Q1 sort of commissioning it. Could you give us a bit more on it? How much it was on the plan? Are much was underground development? And how does that sort of compare to what you would expect to spend in Q2, Q3 and Q4?

Frank, can you answer that?

I'll take a shot at it. The majority of that $18 million is being booked as pre-development cost. The majority of that -- at least, in March when the commission the mill with the -- a good portion of that spending, at least, in March. Prior to March, January and February was more about capitalized drilling and some surface infrastructure developments. Just officers we've had, we've launched a very good size drilling program, but we also had invest some capital in places to cover and store the core, and get our core logging done. So there's been pretty service and structure were going on. So -- drilling predominantly, but now as the mill, we'll have a pretty good chunk of pre-development costs that will represent those of predevelopment category going forward and that's kind of where things are at the moment. And one more point, you know, there is relatively small mobile fleet. Because, like I said before, the mines not huge mine. We've got a couple of loaders and couple of -- motors, and actually [indiscernible]

And drilling will use like what jumbos? Or do you jack leg or--

No, we're using mechanized drills. And we'll go to They have been using whatever mining development took place prior to our ownership was all very annual like Jack legs and so on. But we know that we'll have higher productivity and lower cost by going to more mechanized means of doing that work.

And on that CapEx, does that included in your budget?

That's right.

Okay. Great. And maybe one last question from me, in terms of just, at the corporate level, I guess, Mitch or Peter. I see that you're on sustaining cost came in lower than your full-year guidance. I believe, it was $14.33 an ounce. Your full year guidance is $15 to $15.50. Did you beat your internal budgets? Did you expect Q1 to be lower than your full year guidance?

I would say, it's Mitch, mixed bag. I guess, part of the benefit of having assets. Palmarejo was ahead and, I think, Rochester was ahead. Kensington and Wharf slightly above, but everybody got good plans in the case of Kensington and Wharf to get those back down throughout the remainder of the year. And, hopefully, Rochester and Palmarejo can sustain the good trends that establish in the first quarter.

The next question comes from [indiscernible].

Just a couple of questions for me. Just first on Silvertip. As you ramp up over the year, there is some fairly restrictive logistics issues in BC, both on the and port side. Do you guys have logistics capacity wrapped up --

Frank, do you want to take that?

Yes, sure. Well, we're pretty well -- which are challenging because of the distance and the of the side, but we've got full trucking -- to get our concentrates off it besides two locations to send our concentrates. All the materials that are inbound to the mine are coming in. There has been plenty of logistical support for that at this point in time. It's a bit labor-intensive you get of and you still have 25 kilometers of road to getting to the site. We're having trucks [indiscernible] tax rates really bad, help trucks and so on get up to the site, actually calm down, as we get out of winter. But, yes, we have -- we're pretty good shape logistically.

Okay. Great. And then your concentrate, is that all committed to the ocean partners at benchmark terms?

Yes. We have third-party relationship and where broker all the concentrates through them.

Okay. And then may be switching gears to Rochester at the HPGR there. When I look around and see HPGR deployment, places like -- the typical use is to manage power consumption while your crashing harder rock. Now I know you get some recoveries improvement such as by the way and rock breaks, but I'm not surprised by how much equipment you're projecting? And so, I guess, my question is, how comfortable are you with those projections? And then secondly, as you build these projections based on the scale up curves, what is the around those curves?

Yes. We're very confident given the amount of volume of tests that we've done to make the disclosures we've had, we're very confident. And there is probably a plus or minus 2% to 3% contingency around those figures that we're disclosing. We've done a lot of test work. And yes, you're right about the energy. Well, we're actually end up comparable if not slightly higher installed horsepower to crush our material, but it will be done at a much more efficient power consumption. So that and then combining with the better maintenance attributes, that's the kind of basis what you see in the PEA.

The next question comes from Mark Mihaljevic with RBC.

So couple of questions. First off, can you just give a bit of a color on the how the infill drilling at Silvertip is going? And what portion of that reserve do you think it actually be able to include into a reserve category given, obviously, you'll be constrained and what you can put in the mine plan?

Frank, either of you want to take that?

I'll take it. The drilling is doing great. We're ahead of schedule now, up to 6 rigs. The budget was for 30,000 meters by June 30th and we're up to -- we're drilling 25 meters per week right now. The core looks good. We're hitting zones where we expect to hit them up based on very loose model. And in some cases, the zone is thicker. The grades that we are getting back which is delayed by 1.5 months on turn on, are looking good, if not better than we've modeled in the areas that we've got the model. So just based on what -- we typically see in our deposits like Kensington, which are quite erratic high-grade. We would expect something like 50% conversion of the resource.

Okay. And on the same way in there, obviously, large M&I and at Kensington, just wondering what you guys assume internally for read those conversion? And what portion of that resource is just under drilled versus the portion that doesn't quite make it given the capital commitment to get the development work you need to get there?

Yes, there is quite complicated and we're getting close to the edges of the deposit at perse as we know it. So part of the conversion will be difficult in the inferred and M&I. Having said that, we expect about 50% overall conversion there. So we're looking at a another 4, 5 years in mine life if everything converts like that. I do expect more growth. We're launching program this year. And that program will be looking for more Jualin and ravens equivalence. And now we're starting to understand the structural setting of these types of And -- so I think things are going to advance a little bit more this year than prior years in terms of how we explore the district. Whereas, priors we mainly focused on what we know on where we're going to infill how we're going to make the mine more profitable, now we're going to certainly look at the growth in the district. So a 50% conversion on the M&I and the inferred to answer your question. And then look for us to start doing some stepup drilling this year.

Okay. And then, I guess, following on that stepup drilling, how far from the mill do you think would still be economical? What's the target area that you're looking at right now? And what type of commitment are you putting into that?

Yes. There's two things I can reference for you. One is the map regarding the Kensington news release, and that there is several really good maps and technical report. And coincidentally, the mining engineer has just happened to put a tunnel along the trend of these new targets. So if you look at where the tunnel is relative to where, say for example, Jualin and then straight line up to Raven is, that's where will be drilling and those are literally hundreds of meters from mining infrastructure. So that's our focus. Similar what we do at Palmarejo, we stay within a corridor that -- if we find something to capital to develop is minimal, we'll do the same thing at Kensington.

And just in terms of dollars, I think, of -- of our overall exploration expected to spend this year, I think, between expense and capitalized, we're looking at right around $10 million, probably 2/3 of that's capitalized, 1/3 expense to support those priorities.

So, I guess, reasonable assumption is that the majority of the drilling will be on those earlier-stage targets this year? And do any of these historical mines still have old resources? Or data that you guys can leverage off or you just kind of know that where these all mines going in very early stage?

We have been able to locate historical documents, but, in many cases, it's not compliant data that we're able to, so we're going to have to do some drilling and make sure we achieve compliance on those before we disclose things like that. But give you a good indication.

Back to the point about the capitalized versus stepout drilling. The capitalized drilling is backhanded this year. We won't really get to that until about mid-summer to late summer. We're waiting for some development work to get us into some areas like in the upper part of Kensington. Those are pretty high confidence infill capitalized drilling dollars, so that's good money well spent, but it will be later in the year when we spend that money. The step-up drilling will start in the summer we expect to start telling one of the targets called shoreward anytime in the next month or so and then at the other ones later on. There are surface occurrences where historical mining took place but like Frank said we don't have anything that we have confidence resource, that just historic production numbers that from the early 1900s on these veins. And those actually were the veins remind in history of Kensington.

The next question comes from the line of Michael Dudas with Vertical Research.

Mitch, you look towards may be late this year, early next. Your current targets for balance sheet ratios? And how comfortable you are to achieve those targets or what you look at more sustainably longer term?

Peter, you want to?

Sure. Yes, Mike. Current leverage ratio, total leverage around 2.5x, we're comfortable with that. But certainly, over the coming -- by the end of the year, that should start to come down. We are anticipating generating some free cash flow this year, I think, the majority of that will take place in the 2019. In terms of ratios that we're comfortable with, but as I said, we're not comfortable with where we are watching our leverage come down and having the flexibility with the revolver in place to apply that free cash flow and deleverage the business is an advantage for us. I would say 0 net debt is a good long-term objective for us. And I think with this asset mix, et cetera, we're going accomplish it as well.

That's well said. And Mitch, I don't know, you had a meeting with some of your Silver Institute and industry colleagues last week. You saw some thoughts on what he thinks happening it up there on the market place and some of the interest and excitement on the silver is warranted this time?

Yes. It was an interesting update on last year's supply, demand numbers for silver. I thought that the things very interesting to me was the declining overall supply of silver globally for the second beer in a row after what I think was 14 -- 13 or 14 years in a row of supply increases. We're now seeing that trend reversed itself. So that was one big take away. Industrial demand, actually grew. And the big driver was solar panels. Photovoltaic demand was, I think, it was 80 million or 90 million ounces now. Dozen years ago, that was something like 5 million ounces. So the growth is significant. It's expected to continue. Same thing with automobiles. Everybody talks about batteries and all the battery metals. And seems like Silver doesn't often get. Its fair shake in those discussions, but silver is a very critical metal in terms of the electrification of cars. The additional technology that's going into cars now. All need silver. The amount of silver in the new automobiles now is about an ounce for every new automobile sold. And but, overall, global auto sales increasing. That's a nice that's a growth segment for silver as well. Coins, U.S. coin and bar demand has been incredibly weak, the last two years. And that has been somewhat surprising. Usually, there seems to be an almost insatiable appetite from the U.S. kind of retail segment for coins and small bars, but that has largely gone away. People speculate, but that may be given the strong broader equity markets. Just some of that money is going that direction rather than in the coins, but nobody really, really knows. But overall, it was a pretty positive picture. And I think, the declining supply I think usually, as you know, the silver stretches out to the kind of ratio that is out relative to gold, where it's around 80:1. You generally will see at some point kind of catch-up phase, that we all kind of open thing will be coming. I was struck the other day this just one other quick anecdote. I look at our 2013 annual report the other day, and our average realized price that year was about $1,325 an ounce of gold, which is basically where gold is today. But the average price of silver that year was $32 an ounce was twice of what it is today. So it's kind of amazing how much that stretched out despite the fundamentals improving. So I think -- over time there is good chance silver is going to catch up and we still have a good chunk of our business that's, obviously, tied to that metal.

Let's get back to the future, that's for sure.

This concludes question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference over to Mitch for any closing remarks.

Well, great. I appreciate all the questions. And we appreciate your time this morning. We look forward to speaking with you again in July, which will be great and warm, to discuss our second quarter results. So thanks, again, for your time. Have a good day.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.