Good day, and welcome to the Coeur Mining Fourth Quarter 2021 Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]. Please note, this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Jeff Wilhoit. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, and good morning. Welcome to Coeur Mining's fourth quarter and full year 2021 earnings conference call. Our results were released after yesterday's market close and a copy of the press release and slides are available on our website. I would like to remind everyone that our press release, slides and some of our comments today include forward-looking statements from which actual results may differ. Please review the cautionary statements included in our press release and presentation, as well as the risk factors described in our 2021 10-K. I'll now turn it over to the team.

Thanks, Jeff, and good morning, everyone. 2021 was an important year for Coeur, characterized by elevated levels of investment in our highly successful multi-year exploration program and in our robust project pipeline. These investments last year, along with several transactions intended to strengthen and streamline our portfolio, our key elements of our strategy to position Coeur as America's premier growing precious metals company. We are now quickly approaching a phase of expected high-return growth featuring sustained levels of expected free cash flow from a larger, longer life, lower-cost production base generated by our collection of North American assets. Looking back at last year, I'm especially proud that our team accomplished everything they did, while delivering another year of consistent operational excellence despite a challenging macroeconomic environment. I'll start off on Slide 3 in today's presentation with a few key highlights. With a strong finishing kick in the fourth quarter, Coeur once again achieved consolidated annual production and unit costs within guidance at each of our primary gold operations, which contributed to our highest annual revenue in nearly a decade. I'll ask Mick to go into the specific operational drivers of our performance in a moment, but I'll touch on a few key highlights. Palmarejo delivered particularly strong results with $25 million of cash flow in the fourth quarter on a 14% increase in mill throughput. Strong throughput and grades drove solid free cash flow at Kensington. Wharf delivered on plan following a near record third quarter and Rochester rebounded nicely from a third quarter marked by crushing and hauling work related to the POA 11 expansion. Ore tons placed increased 12% despite a greater than 100 year rain event in October that impacted about 10 days of production. We've asked a lot from Rochester as we work our way through…

Thanks, Mitch. On Slide 5, I'll cover the operations, starting off with Palmarejo. The team tends to finish the year strong and last year was no exception, delivering a 14% increase in mill throughput quarter-over-quarter and higher grade. Full-year gold production was at the high end of the guidance range and silver production was in line with expectations. At the same time, unit costs for both gold and silver came in closer to the low end of our guidance ranges and benefited from Mexican peso hedges throughout the year. Another solid operating year resulted in nearly $66 million of free cash flow, a great result. Looking ahead, we anticipate a similar year for Palmarejo with higher grade, partially offset by lower throughput. As a remainder, our first quarter cash flows will again be impacted by the annual Mexican EBITDA tax payment. Switching over to Rochester. When we spoke on last quarter's call, Northern Nevada was experiencing a historic rain event that impacted about 10 days of ore production. With the rain event in the third quarter crushing and hauling over-liner of POA 11 behind them, the team finished the year on a strong note. This great finish helped us to achieve the low end of our production guidance for silver, while gold production was near the midpoint of expectations. Haul truck availability issues and continued higher prices for consumables led to unit costs coming in higher than expected. Going forward, we are continuing to focus on performance enhancements and driving sustained improvements in our results. We plan to install prescreens on the existing crusher aimed at mitigating the impact of fine ore material and improving recoveries. During the installation around mid-year, we expect our ability to crush material will be affected for up to 30 days. We continue to use…

Thanks, Mick. Turning to Slide 4. I'll quickly run through our consolidated financial results. Stable metal prices and consistent performance at our mine sites led to a historic top line result of nearly $833 million. Operating cash flow totaled $110 million, a decrease compared to 2020 largely due to Rochester's negative operating cash flow and the inflationary environment that we, like all miners, have been facing for labor, fuel and other consumables. Despite these cost pressures, we were pleased to achieve CAS guidance at each of our primary gold operations for the year. Looking ahead, as highlighted on Slide 15, we issued our 2022 guidance. These guidance ranges show a fairly flat year production wise compared to 2021. Slide 6 provides an illustrative quarterly production profile, which highlights a slightly back half weighted year in terms of production. On costs, while we do expect to see a continuation of the inflationary pressures we experienced during the second half of 2021, we expect a significant improvement in Rochester's operating cash flow in 2022. You will notice that we have reduced our planned investments in exploration and at Silvertip year-over-year as we pursue our number one priority to complete the Rochester expansion. I'll remind everyone that our first quarter also includes some lumpy annual expenditures, which will impact our Q1 operating cash flow. Turning to Slide 12 for a look at the balance sheet. We ended the year with approximately $257 million of liquidity, including $57 million of cash and $200 million of availability under our revolving credit facility. We also held $132 million of equity investments, comprised primarily of our investment in Victoria Gold on our balance sheet. We ended the year with a net debt-to-EBITDA ratio of 2 times. The increase in POA 11 capital for the SMPEI contracts and the prescreens will put pressure on our desired leverage levels. However, our funding plan remains intact with several layers of financial flexibility from six key sources. Our operating cash flow from our four operating mines, capital leases for POA 11, which were entered into in early 2021, our gold hedging program, the revolving credit facility capacity, which can be expanded by up to $100 million, our equity investment portfolio, including our investment in Victoria Gold and our $100 million ATM program. We remain confident in our ability to fund our growth initiatives. I will now pass the call back to Mitch.

Thanks, Tom. Before moving to the Q&A, I want to quickly highlight Slide 14 that outlines our near-term priorities for the year ahead. In a nutshell, 2022 really boils down to achieving production and cost guidance safely and responsibly and remaining zealous stewards of our capital as we continue to execute on our major growth projects. With that, let's go ahead and open it up for questions.

[Operator Instructions]. And the first question will come from Dalton Baretto with Canaccord.

I want to start by asking about what Tom just wrapped up, and that's on the POA 11 CapEx as well as the funding options. First of all, I just want to know you're just under halfway through the spend, how comfortable are you in the updated number at this point and do you see any risk that, that could go up higher?

Yes. Good question, I guess, Dalton, coming out of that re-baselining work that just wrapped up, our confidence can't be any higher now than it is, not to say that the world is an unpredictable place right now and it's not the easiest of times to have a major capital expansion project. But I think we have layered in a lot more of buffer to reflect some of the uncertainties that are out there, whether it's the labor, whether it's the material. I think we're up to a P85 kind of level of confidence on this capital estimate. And so going into the end of last year, confidence was shaky given all the macro and project-specific questions and cross wins. I think now coming into 2022, confidence has been bolstered significantly. Mick, do you have anything? Or Tom, do you want to?

Yes. So it's a P85 project schedule and cost estimate now, very solid. And that schedule is agreed with our primary contractor at TIC. So, we're pretty happy about where we stand now in the go-forward path.

Okay. And then Tom highlighted your different funding avenues on my numbers at the current commodity price levels. It looks like you're going to go through your current revolver and need some pretty significant incremental funding. So, I guess three parts to this question. Number one, how far are you willing to push your balance sheet? Number two, how do you think about the accordion versus the ATM, versus your stake in Victoria, particularly given where your share price is right now? And then part three, why haven't you put in any collars for '23?

Okay. All three good questions. The last one there, Dalton, was collars for 2023?

Yes. Correct.

Yes. Okay, thanks. Got it. How far do you want to stretch our balance sheet? Look, we had, going into the end of the year, middle part of last year had sort of set that target of having a 2 times net debt to EBITDA as we've gone into this more inflationary environment here in the second -- well, last year in the second half and realizing that's likely the new reality here in 2022 and 2023. We recognized that leverage ratio is going to be exceeded by how far that sort of spills into your second question, which relates to the accordion and the revolver as you're alluding to there. The current revolver under which we have $200 million or so of availability, there is an option and an opportunity to expand that by $100 million. So, we'll definitely be taking a look at that, of course, with the revolver comes certain covenant ratios, which will govern essentially how much leverage and how far we will push the balance sheet and that'll be a discussion that we want to have with the lender group. And as far as the ATM, it's one of those levers that we have, that we put in place a couple of years ago. It's a good thing to have, I think in the quiver to help kind of round out the suite of options as we navigate our way through here. In particular, the first half of this year, peak spend on POA 11 is really in this quarter and next quarter before it starts to step down. So, these different options and funding alternatives that Tom outlined are really most targeted towards the first half of this year. As far as the collars, Tom and I were meeting on that even this morning because we, obviously like everybody, seen the gold price show some strength here and it's something that we want to try and take advantage of here and whether it's boosting our downside protection here in 2022 and open to the 2023, at least first half as well because all this funding plan that we've thought a lot about, we are reliant on prices remaining near these current levels. And so anything we can do to kind of reduce that element of the equation is something that makes a lot of sense for us to think about adding to what we already have in place. Tom, do you want to cover any of those three?

Yes. Look, as Mitch mentioned that 2 times will obviously be stretched. Probably the number that we all -- all we think about is at least maintaining $100 million of liquidity. But again, back to your first question, our confidence level in that remaining capital at POA 11 is very high, right? When you look at the amount of work that's done, all the equipments been ordered. We really worked hard on that SMPEI contract to see what we can do to refine it. We unfortunately weren't able to get that much of a reduction. But what we do have is a really high-quality partner. And so I feel very comfortable that with the work that the team has done that we're -- that, that capital is in place. And those alternatives that we've outlined are there and people see the prize. The lenders, hopefully, all of our investors see the prize post the POA 11 expansion, those pretty robust cash flows. And you look at what we've done in terms of extending all of the mine lives. We're feeling pretty comfortable, Dalton.

[Operator Instructions]. Our next question will come from Karl Blunden with Goldman Sachs.

I just wanted to discuss a little bit more some of the funding options that came up. But when you think about in ATM relative to other options, maybe non-core asset sales or stake sales, how does the current share price play into that? You probably don't want to be selling at a time when you feel the stock is undervalued, for example. So just any framework around that would be pretty interesting.

Yes. You're right. We -- that's always sort of at the bottom of the list in terms of cost of capital, but it also is -- you need to -- we feel like, and I feel like we have to pull the lens back a little bit and look at what are the returns that you're generating off of that cost of capital. And even with the higher capital, higher OpEx, dialing back to silver recovery in the -- that updated S-K 1300 for Rochester, it's still a good project, right, a high-teens rate of return. Tom alluded to the sustainable $90 million a year of free cash flow. So the cost of capital to deliver that kind of quality project and others, including the exploration investment that we've been making, kind of puts those relative cost of capital into some context. But it ends up, I think, Karl, being a bit of a holistic approach, right, between the revolver and the ATM and the other levers that Tom talked about, trying to think about it in a -- in an overall way that can ensure that we achieve the main goal, which is to deliver a successful expansion out there at Rochester. I don't know if that helps, give you some context. But Tom, anything you want to add to that? Does that help, Karl?

Yes. I think that helps to recognize that you've safeguarded the balance sheet in the past on projects that you've been developing. With regard to Silvertip, I noticed the comment that it would be after Rochester. I'm not sure if that's a very recent change, but it sounds like the sequencing there is quite precise at this point in time. When you think about that, do you want the balance sheet and leverage to be in a certain place before you go after that? Or is that not as large of a consideration given some discussion around, that you have different funding options and you wouldn't have to necessarily do it with your balance sheet to grow that out? So interested in how that fits now with the updated Rochester CapEx?

Yes, I'll start and then Tom can weigh in. It is something we alluded to, I think, in the third quarter about the sequencing and being mindful of making sure that Rochester is priority #1, that we deliver that. Meanwhile, we'll continue to do this work at Silvertip, and we'll have more to say on that later this year. I think some of the suggestions you pointed out, Karl, it's almost like all of the above. We want to get on the backside of the POA 11 and use that cash flow to delever, for sure, and that's with or without Silvertip. That's a high priority. That will happen. But I think also, yes, there are other options for Silvertip as far as how we would think about funding an expansion of that facility that could be not necessarily the same approach as we're taking to how we're funding POA 11. Tom, do you want to?

No. Exactly, right? Everything is on the table in terms of alternatives about how to fund that project. And it's just a pity, capital costs have gone where they -- they've gone at Rochester and for Silvertip because, obviously, we're very excited about what we've seen on -- at Silvertip, the exploration results. The growth in the resource are pretty exciting. As we talked about on earlier calls, the metallurgical recovery, all those testing, the quality of the concentrates are -- continue to have us pretty excited. But one step at a time. We've got to get POA 11 done first.

That's helpful. If I could just request just to fill in on one piece of the question, I think I had mentioned non-core assets. But maybe just general stakes that you own, for example, the Victoria Gold stake, how should we think about that going forward at this point?

Well, it's a hard one to really define, right, in terms of how to think about it. We made that investment because we think that Eagle operation is a high-quality asset. There was a unique opportunity to acquire that 18% stake from Orion. It's a kind of on strategy for us. How that plays out from here is -- I can't really speculate, but it does figure into our future one way or another, right? And which path and when is still TBD. But as we always think about our funding alternatives, that $130 million or so of equity there is something that factors into the calculus. So, that's kind of a non-answer, but it's a part of the overall equation, I guess.

The next question will come from Mark Reichman with NOBLE Capital Markets.

So on Rochester, so the crushing circuit gets completed in the third quarter of 2023. So, there's a lot of talk about mid-2023. I was just -- kind of pin you down on what to assume for commercial production. Would you just kind of expect that it'd be full-year 2024? Or when do you expect kind of meaningful production from the expansion?

Yes, I'll start and then, Mick. Thanks for the question, Mark. Construction completion of the crusher by the end of the second quarter.

Mechanical.

Mechanical. And then we go into commissioning throughout the second half of 2023 with the first full year in 2024. In terms of commercial -- reaching commercial production levels?

We would expect to reach commercial production levels before the end of '23 to have a full year of production in '24. That's our hope. But we'll have to build that into the commissioning plans and get the detail of that later this year.

And then the second question. Thanks for that. So next year, kind of lower exploration expenditures, I guess, really just to -- do you have a replacement lined up for Hans, who I thought was retiring? And then also, is -- are there any opportunities to extend the mine life at Kensington? Or will that just become kind of less important as Rochester gets expanded and then eventually, you bring on a larger Silvertip?

Yes. I'll take the Hans question first. We just can't get him to leave. He's hanging out here again in the conference room. Just kidding. There will be -- there's been a process underway to identify a replacement for Hans. We've made good progress on that front, and Hans is kind enough to be flexible with his plans and his schedule to help with an orderly transition here in the first part of 2022. In terms of Kensington, good question. It's obviously our shortest mine life. It's been that way now for a few -- well, it's been that way for quite a few years as an underground mine. And it's been a good asset. The last few years, it's generated really good cash flows for us. It should do another good year for us this year. We've been investing in exploration at Kensington, mostly on the resource expansion side versus infill to kind of grow the inventory or pipeline, as Mick would say of resource ounces. And we've been actually quite successful at that. You look over the last three years, resources have grown by nearly 30%. And we've replaced about two-thirds of what we've produced over the last three years. So, we have seen a little bit of reserve depletion there. This is an important year here in 2022 as we focus, especially in the first half of the year on more infill drilling to try and convert some of that larger inventory of resources that we've added over the last few years into reserves. And as we continue to do the work on testing some other structures that we've identified from the drilling over the last few years to see what the longer-term future might be there at Kensington. So the key is really to turn our focus more toward infill this year and see if we can maintain this three-ish year mine life out ahead of us, which, as an underground mine, expensive underground capital development. You don't want to get too far out ahead of ourselves on a P&P basis. But that's just some thoughts, Mark, on how we're thinking about Kensington. I don't know, Hans or Mick, did I leave anything out?

The next question is a follow-up from Dalton Baretto with Canaccord.

I've actually got a couple more. Number one, the screen, the $80 million on screens. Can you help me understand what the incremental benefit is?

Yes. I'll start and then Mick, over to you. That $70 million to $80 million is a combination of screens and additional contingency that we're adding to the overall project capital estimate. I think of that $70 million to $80 million, I think the screens are about $50 of it. So, there's that element of that extra range tied to screens for the Limerick crusher. Mick, do you want to talk about the incremental benefit and even a little bit about what we're doing at the existing pressure with screens this year?

Absolutely. So if we look at Limerick and the benefits that we've built into the technical report, we've been fairly conservative. We put a couple of percent of improved recoveries in there from screens. And then it allows us to effectively bypass the tertiary crushers and increases the throughput. So if you look at where we were for the original business case for POA 11, it was at about 28.5 million tonnes a year. We now work towards 32 million tonnes a year. So that's -- they are some of the two key benefits from putting screens in, as well as, of course, allowing us to drive the top site down -- top site sizes on the crusher so that we can maximize those recoveries. So, there may be some upside in recoveries, but we're not going to build those in yet until we've tested the ex-pit. We should build the ex-pit screen later this year, middle of the year, and then we'll get a few months of optimization ahead of building out the Limerick screens. So, we'll have really good test work to optimize early and quickly when we start commissioning the Limerick.

Got it. Okay. And then my second question is around timing, which I think on previous call I just alluded to. How confident are you in timing given all the supply chain issues that we keep hearing about?

Well, as the -- not to be too cute about it, as the finish line gets closer and more money gets spent, we're getting more and more confident. There's less things that are not yet ordered or unknown or uncertain or long lead times that have big question marks next to them. But Mick, do you want to?

We had a delivery schedule and a lot of that was in the early part of '22. And a lot of that equipment on long lead is already arriving at the site and actually being placed because we're now in a good spot with concrete and foundation. So, we can take that equipment in and set it straight away. So, that part of the project is going really well.

That's good to hear. And then just maybe one last one. I noticed Terry Smith took a new job this morning. Any impacts of the project there at all?

Well, let's see, we made a change there middle of last year. And so, no, we have a projects team under Mick that is running with POA 11 and Silvertip, and then all the other capital projects at the existing operations. So that was -- I hadn't seen that. I hadn't heard Terry landed somewhere, which is great, but that was a change that took place, I think, last...

September.

Is it September?

Okay. I didn't realize it was that long.

The next question will come from Brian Mather with Raymond James.

Sorry, just back to funding. First thing, do you still expect the La Preciosa transaction to close early this year so you'll get that $15 million in?

Yes. Just waiting for that COFECE approval in Mexico, which should be here in the -- hopefully in the first quarter.

Perfect. And then secondly, just with Silvertip timing, I think everybody has kind of talked about this. Obviously, there's different -- the most important thing is to get Rochester finished and there's different ways to that. But it probably involves, as you said, balance sheet is going to be higher going forward. And then you talked about obviously, hopefully, at some stage, you're going to be having cash flows coming out of Rochester in a big way. But how do you think about the timing of the Silvertip restart versus -- because your balance sheet will be pushed further up than maybe you want? Capital is going to be needed for Silvertip. You talked about alternative financing. Are we talking about potentially -- would you go as far as putting a stream -- a silver stream on Silvertip and make it mostly a zinc, lead mine because there's a lot of that in there and arbitrage that? Or would you turn around and hedge the zinc and lead? I'm just trying to figure out, even if we get -- once we get by, and I get it, the most important thing is Rochester, how do you think about the funding out in '24, let's say, or '25, if you want to get Silvertip in by '26?

Yes. A few variables there. It's kind of a fun question that you're asking. I think let's get the plan -- let's identify a plan and a path that maximizes the value of that deposit. But as we're hopefully getting towards that goal here in the second half of this year, the thinking, as you pull the lens back, like you, Brian, get past Rochester expansion, the ideal scenario, I think we've alluded to in the past has been this idea of starting at Silvertip on a smaller scale and then scaling it up to a larger throughput, in large part, self-funded from its own cash flow. That might help us come up with a path that's not only sooner, but less capital intense. And so I'm just sort of hypothesizing here about what we'd like to see ideally. But if there was a scaled-up operation that could help kind of -- could self-fund itself in large part, that could be a key part of how we think about funding an expansion and restart. On top of that then would come some other things, a couple that you mentioned that are on the table, for sure, whether there's a prepay of some sort, JV partners. I mean, if this gets to be a scale that we think it potentially could be, the size of the prize here could be big enough to make sense to share it with a partner, whether that's another operating company or more of a financial non-operating entity. Those are all sort of on the radar screen of the alternatives that we consider once we have and assuming we have a viable business plan here identified later in the year. Does that give you some sense of what that is?

Yes. That does help. As you said, there's a lot of variables. That's why I was just curious what you were sort of envisioning at the moment. So, that's very helpful.

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mitchell Krebs for any closing remarks. Please go ahead, sir.

Okay. Well, thank you, and we appreciate everybody's time this morning. And we'll look forward to speaking with you all again in the spring to talk about our first quarter results. So, thanks for the good questions and your time. And have a great day.

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