Good day, everyone. Welcome to Kosmos Energy's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2023 Conference Call. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. At this time, let me turn the call over to Jamie Buckland, Vice President of Investor Relations at Kosmos Energy.

Thank you, operator, and thanks to everyone for joining us today. This morning we issued our fourth quarter and full year 2023 earnings release. This release and the slide presentation to accompany today's call are available on the investors page of our website. Joining me on the call today to go through the material are Andy Inglis, Chairman and CEO; and Neal Shah, CFO. During today's presentation, we will make forward-looking statements that refer to our estimates, plans and expectations. Actual results and outcomes could differ materially, due to factors that we note in this presentation and in our UK and SEC filings. Please refer to our annual report, stock exchange announcement and SEC filings for more details. These documents are available on our website. At this time, I will turn the call over to Andy.

Thanks, Jamie, and good morning and afternoon to everyone. Thank you for joining us today for our fourth quarter and full year results call. I'd like to begin today's call talking about our purpose as a company, which defines our strategy and the characteristics that make Kosmos unique. We'll then provide an update on our operational and financial progress in 2023, before looking forward to a catalyst rich year ahead. Starting on Slide 3. At Kosmos, our purpose is clear. We are a leading deepwater independent E&P company, focused on meeting the world's growing demand for cleaner energy. With oil production from our low-cost lower carbon oil assets in Ghana, the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and Equatorial Guinea, we are providing the world with the energy it needs today. At the same time, we're developing cleaner sources of energy for the future through world scale gas projects offshore Mauritania and Senegal. And finally, as we deliver the energy the world needs, we strive to be a force for good in the countries we operate in, accelerating economic and social progress across our host nations. We do this through growing production, which leads to increased revenues and royalties for the countries. We are also providing natural gas for domestic use in power generation, enhancing access to more affordable and more reliable electricity, while also investing in important social programs in our countries of operation. Turning to Slide 4. Kosmos has a unique investment case with a world-class portfolio, differentiated growth in the right assets and strong free cash flow outlook. Taking those three in turn; first, we have a diversified portfolio of world-class assets. This portfolio is comprised of advantaged oil assets today, characterized by production with low-cost and top-quartile carbon intensity. Alongside our oil assets, we're building out our advantaged…

Thanks, Andy. Turning to Slide 11. Production for the year was in line with the updated guidance we provided last quarter with 4Q production at the lower end of the range due to the water injection issues that Jubilee flagged earlier. These issues have now been resolved and Andy will give an update on current operations in Ghana shortly. OpEx for the quarter was higher than anticipated due to higher workover costs for the initial rig activity in Equatorial Guinea before the operator terminated the rig contract for safety issues, which we'll also talk about in more detail shortly. Other costs including DD&A, G&A and tax all came in below guidance tax all came in below guidance, helping to drive today's EPS beat versus consensus. We did record an impairment to 10, reducing the carrying value down to zero, reflecting an anticipated reduced activity set together with well performance. Positive 1P reserve additions at Jubilee more than offset the downward revision to 10 1P reserves during the period. While we still see future potential value at 10, both in oil and gas, the realization of that value is contingent on the approval of the plan of development and the activity set has to compete for capital with other opportunities we have in the Kosmos portfolio. CapEx for the quarter was higher-than-expected largely due to the timing of inventory related to the EG drilling program. Inventory arrived earlier-than-expected and therefore was recognized as CapEx in the fourth quarter. I'll now hand it back to Andy to go through the outlook for the year ahead.

Thanks, Neil. Let's turn to Slide 13. 2023 was a pivotal year in Ghana with the start of a Jubilee Southeast with more to come in 2024. Full year guidance from the operator for Jubilee and TEN is around 116,500 barrels of oil per day gross, which equates to around 40,000 barrels of oil per day net to Kosmos with a further 6,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day net of gas. At Jubilee, operator guidance is for 100,000 barrels of oil per day gross for the year, with production expected to grow through the year as new wells come online. So far, one water injector and one producer have been brought online in 2024. A second producer well is expected online imminently and that should take Jubilee production back above 100,000 barrels of oil per day gross with two additional wells due online thereafter. In addition to the infill drilling program, our focus with the operator this year is on management of the production base, targeting 100% voidage replacement. We've had a good start to the year injecting record levels of water into the field and plan to continue optimizing injection support this year. As production rises, the reduction in OpEx per barrel we saw last year should be maintained, as the partnership continues to drive through efficiencies and fixed costs are spread over more barrels. On gas, the interim gas sales agreement for Jubilee has been extended through the end of May at around $3 per MMBtu. On TEN, operator guidance is around 16,500 barrels of oil per day gross through 2024. On the TEN plan of development, we are awaiting government approval and therefore have not planned any major activity on the field this year. Turning to Slide 14. In the Gulf of Mexico, 2024 is expected…

Thanks, Andy. Turning to Slide 17. As Andy mentioned, we remain focused on enhancing the financial resilience of the company as production rises over the coming months and CapEx falls. In 2023, we repaid the Gulf of Mexico term loan, which means we have no debt maturities this year. On the RBL, represented by the dark blue blocks on the chart, the refinancing process with our bank group is going well with completion expected in the first half of the year. The aim is to push out maturities by approximately three years, which would push the final maturity to almost 2030. On leverage, we exited 2023 at 1.9x and have a long-term target of 1.5x or below at mid cycle for oil prices. With CapEx anticipated to be higher in the first half of this year, the cash generation we expect once production is ramped up should come through in the second half of 2024 and would be used for debt pay down. Leverage should then start to fall quickly towards our target. Turning to Slide 18, our capital allocation priorities for the year. CapEx for full year 2024 is expected to be $700 million to $750 million just over a third of which is maintenance CapEx. Growth CapEx is anticipated to be around 60% to 65% of 2024 total primarily related to completing Winterfell in Phase 1 of GTA, which does include some duplicative subsea costs incurred as a result of the switch in subsea contractors made last year. We hope to recoup this through the recovery of damages from the process mentioned earlier. Looking beyond 2024, we expect normalized annual CapEx to be around $550 million with around $300 million to $350 million in maintenance CapEx and $200 million to $250 million of growth CapEx. As CapEx falls and free cash flow increases, we have three clear priorities; first, enhance our financial resilience. As noted on the previous slide, we want to get absolute debt and leverage down sharply, and this will be the first call on free cash flow generation. Second, we want to invest selectively in compelling opportunities. We support the continuing growth of the company, albeit at a lower rate than what we expect in 2023 and 2024. And third, when leverage is in the right place, we will look at shareholder returns. I'll now hand back to Andy to conclude today's presentation.

Thanks, Neal. Turning now to Slide 19. 2023 was a year of continued delivery for Kosmos. We achieved a lot with production growing through the second half of the year as the first of our major development projects came online at Jubilee Southeast and we remain on track to achieve our production growth target by the end of this year. We made a Tiberius discovery and we took over operatorship of Yakaar Teranga. 2024 is a catalyst rich year with Jubilee ramp up and Winterfell first oil both expected in the coming months. Later in the year, first gas from Tortue will be a major milestone for both the company and the countries of Mauritania and Senegal. Rising production and falling CapEx drive strong cash generation through year end into 2025, with rapid deleveraging towards our target debt levels. The Kosmos team is excited about the year ahead and energized to deliver on our strategic objectives. Thank you. I'd now like to turn the call over to the operator to open the session for questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] Our first questions come from the line of David Round with Stifel. Please proceed with your questions.

I've got a couple, please. The first one, Andy, you mentioned -- you made a comment there about potentially crystallizing value from the gas portfolio. Could you elaborate on what you meant by that, please? Whether it's something you're actively looking at or whether that's just in relation to potential income in Yakaar? The second question, we've obviously seen the pause in U.S. LNG export approvals recently. Has that changed any conversations you're having or at least impacted any of your assumptions going forward or is it too early?

Well, it seems to be time for Kosmos in Mauritania and Senegal as we progress our broader agenda. As I said in my comments, Tortue first gas is now in sight. We're making real progress with PETROSEN on the concept for Yakaar Teranga. I'm also pleased that we're making progress with the NOCs and BP on a concept to accelerate Phase 2 ahead of BP's previous timeline. You put all that together and we're building a material LNG business that is coming at the right time. It's coming at a time when the long-term value of gas is being recognized and its role in the energy transition. As you say, the external context is changing. There is a pause in U.S. LNG and I think that is one of the drivers why new sources of gas are being more highly valued. Today, you've seen we’ve step forward with its own announcement about building a larger business. There's probably pluses and minuses on the supply side. But I think one thing that's clear is that the future supply is getting very concentrated. Therefore, new sources of supply that add diversification for customers are going to be valued. So you put all of that together and we've had interest in Yakaar Teranga, as you mentioned. As we stated in our third quarter results, we're looking to bring in a partner with the right skills and balance sheet to help us progress and that is our priority. But whilst it's apparent from the conversations on Yakaar Teranga, there are parties that are interested in potentially a larger stake than just YT in our other assets in Mauritania and Senegal. That's something that we will consider as part of the sell down process in Yakaar Teranga. And why would we do that? Ultimately, it allows us to accelerate our strategic agenda. We can look forward to growth and we've got a very rich hopper, but what's the right working interest for that? And can we find alternative ways to accelerate the delivery of a more resilient balance sheet that enables shareholder returns. So, we see it as being another point -- another way to access and accelerate that outcome. So it's sort of early days. The conversation is primarily around Yakaar Teranga, where we're going to finish the pre-FEED and then start that process. But if there is an option of a larger deal involving Tortue, then that is something we would consider for the reasons that I'd laid out.

Our next question has come from the line of Neil Mehta with Goldman Sachs.

The first question is just about the free cash flow inflection. You talked about $100 million to $150 million a quarter once we get to run rate. Can you talk about what pricing set that's under? And just as you think about going into 2025, as you get to this major free cash flow inflection, what the priorities for cash are in terms of where we go from here?

Yes, let Neal will take out the question just in terms of the metrics that drive it. But I think it's an important, 2024 is an important year where we're completing the two major projects Winterfell and Tortue and that enables us then to get to that free cash flow inflection point. And the delivery of the projects is an important point in the journey for the company. It allows us to strengthen the balance sheet, pay down the debt and at that point then move forward to shareholder returns. But it also enables us to continue growth. But it's important -- it's at a much more measured pace than we've obviously delivered over the past two years. So I think as we go through 2024, 2025 is about that dual agenda, the prioritization of free cash flow to enable the debt pay down, but actually, there will be growth, but it's to be at a much slower pace. But Neal, the fundamental metrics behind the free cash flow?

Yes. I mean, that's based on our sort of current estimates, it's sort of 70 TI, 75-ish Brent.

And then as we think about 2025, couple of cost structure questions. One is, is it fair as a placeholder to be using something in the 550 type of CapEx range recognizing you'll put some more meat on the bones here in the next couple of months? And then, I saw in the footnote that you talk about operating costs $115 million to $130 million for Greater Tortue. Is that the right run rate CapEx once the project comes online?

Sorry, I'll cover your second question first, Neil. Just on the operating costs. Yes, I mean, I think it will be slightly higher because that's sort of phased over time as the development ramps up and we'll get this year, there's a couple of moving parts in terms of the ramp up, commissioning costs, et cetera. So it'll be a little higher than that on a regular basis, but the per metric, barrel metrics, per BCF metrics will look metrics will look more attractive on that basis, on a 25 in regular run rate going forward. And then just sorry, what was your first question again, Neil?

It's just Neal. What do you think of CapEx for '25 rough roll with them recognizing you're going to have?

Yes. And again, I think as we said on the call, so the 20 that $550 million is what we're targeting for the next several years, including 25 beyond. So I think it's a good sort of number to have penciled into your models.

And that number basically underpins sort of maintenance CapEx of about $300 million to $350 million on a long-term basis and then growth of sort of $200 million to $250 million. So much more measured growth and ultimately at $550 million long-term CapEx, you can sustain that free cash flow of $100 to $150 per quarter.

Our next question has come from the line of Matt Smith with Bank of America.

First question on the capital allocation front. Thanks for laying out the detail in the presentation. I think the inflection point is clearly an important one for Kosmos. I guess I just wanted to come back. Is that $550 million CapEx an indication of sort of a steady state or is it firm commitment from Kosmos? Because I think it's clear that you're very opportunity rich. I mean, it's great to see that sort of Phase 2 of Tortue you might be coming back onto the table sooner than previously anticipated. And you talked about Yakar Taranga as well. I guess, I just want to understand whether, say, the $550 million is an indication or really whether that's a commitment to shareholders that sort of whatever the plan, whatever the working interest that's the sort of level of CapEx that you're going to be comfortable sort of spending over the next few years? I just want to sort of understand what -- where the priority is really on that, if that's okay? And then the second question would be on the FPSO in terms of Tortue. I think really confirming the news that we've heard elsewhere in terms of the delay in first gas to the third quarter now? I just wondered whether you'd be able to talk about confidence intervals that you have in terms of reaching that milestone this time around, please.

If I sort of take the first one around capital allocation '24, important year, we're delivering growth through the delivery of Jubilee Southeast continuing growth, Winterfell and Tortue online. And as you look beyond that you're right, we do have a rich hopper. And the important point I think for shareholders is we're really selective about the projects that we do. And we have choices around the timing, the phasing and we have choices as I indicated around David's question, around the level of participation in those projects. So, it's a positive that we have the hopper. It's a positive that we have greater control through operatorship and we want to work within a framework where we can deliver that long-term growth. As I said in my remarks, it will be a much more measured pace than we've experienced over the last 2 years. But the Kosmos portfolio does have longevity and therefore does have a terminal value, but we have to do that while delivering the free cash flow that shareholders want. Ultimately, the first priority for that will be debt pay down. Then once we reach leverage targets, it will be around shareholder returns. The frame that we're using going forward is that $550 million and we're confident that we can sustain the base production, which is a composite and important element both in Ghana, Gulf of Mexico and actually in Guinea in that $300 million to $350 million, which enables that $200 million to $250 million to pursue those selected growth projects. That's the frame going forward and therefore, the free cash flow targets that we've talked about. On Tortue, you asked a specific question about the FPSO. Maybe if I should sort of stand back, because it is going to be a question that's going to…

Our next questions come from the line of Charles Meade with Johnson Rice.

Andy, I wonder if you could -- this is a question about EG. I believe I heard in your prepared comments that the upper end of your guidance assumes that you do get a rig back in there and you get some work done in '24. I wonder if you could speak to what the chances of that are? And perhaps if that's -- if you have some -- if there's any kind of special capability of the rig that you need to procure to do that work or whether it's more of a vanilla thing that has a higher probability of happening?

Yes. I think it's a little early to give you a lot of insight on that. We're clearly just going out to the market, as we speak to look out available rigs. In terms of the spec of the rig, it's not anything out with what a fixed gen can -- 6 Gen can do today. So the only issue is it has to be sort of completion ready because we're obviously on the infill wells we're drilling and completing. You can deepwell it's purely an exploration well. So I think a little early, Charles, to say exactly how that process is going to shake out. But I think we just wanted to make sure in our guidance, we were sort of clear and have covered the spectrum. So we haven't included any contribution from the infill program in our production guidance, but we have included a potential outcome of the rig being included in our activity set in 2024. So I think that's an appropriate way to look at the situation today. And obviously, we'll update you as we make progress in the investigations with the market in terms of available rigs.

And then the follow-up question, along the same line, but in Ghana at TEN, can you give us a sense of -- so you've submitted a new proposed work scope to the government. Can you give us a sense of the timeline for whether when that might be approved and then acted upon? And order of magnitude, what it might -- what it might do to production at that field or that -- those fields?

I think the write-down on TEN was fundamentally around sort of a couple of issues. The first was the well performances of recent wells have been drilled. They haven't delivered quite what we'd hoped. And then, confidence around the future work program, which would require approval from the government in terms of the plan of development. So as of today, we haven't included any significant future work scope in TEN. And equally well, if there was a breakthrough on the PoD, that capital expenditure would have to compete for capital within the framework that we set out in our prepared comments. So I'm comfortable with where we are today. Predicting when the PoD could be approved is tough. There's clearly looking at an election year in Ghana. And I think that makes life a little tougher to be confident about when and if things might happen. But I think the most important thing from a Kosmos perspective is actually, as we've commented earlier, very rich hopper set. We've actually got a very rich set of opportunities in the base between Equatorial Guinea, Gulf of Mexico and actually Ghana in Jubilee. We actually -- the reserve replacement ratio of 104% this year was driven by the performance of Jubilee more than offsetting the downside in TEN. So there is a strong opportunity set there in Jubilee. Jubilee is a field -- a big field that's going to get bigger. And therefore, I can see us prioritizing capital there. So TEN is sort of waiting, and I'm fine with that. I think for us, it's about ensuring that we're putting our base capital to our best opportunities. And certainly, Jubilee would run very highly.

Our next questions come from the line of Bob Brackett with Bernstein Research.

Returning back to the GTA FPSO and the issue around repair of fair leads. Has that FPSO been turned over from the contractor to the operator? Is there some sort of recourse in the same way as say Tortue issues, Jubilee or even the pipeline vessel issues? Will you go back to that contractor and say you didn't deliver the FPSO on time and on scope?

The detailed answer to your question is it has not been turned over. So I think which ultimately answers your subsequent questions.

And an easy follow-up, contrast the challenges around GTA with sort of the process of getting Winterfell up and online in the Gulf of Mexico and talk to your relative conviction there?

You just walk us clearly in the different scale and you're doing something which is sort of establishing a first phase of a larger project with GTA. It is a greenfield project. It's got both got wells. It's got an upturn or it's got an LNG facility and it's got an FPSO. So yes, multiple, as it were segments of the project. Winterfell much more simple sort of tieback. It's in a basin that has the supply base and therefore access to equipment easier and its well subsidy tie back to an existing facility. So, just an ultimate different order of magnitude. And I think it's a great question because it sort of brings you back to the fundamentals of the company. We're investing in short cycle, fast payback ILX type opportunities on the oil side that deliver a very different economic outcome and actually risk profile. But you create the longevity for the business in terms of building out a gas business. Now, we're having established Tortue Phase 1 and Phase 2 is a brownfield, it comes with a very different execution risk. So, it's hard to get started and I think we clearly struggled with Tortue to get it there. But with the end in sight, the next phase is Tortue has got a very different risk profile. So relative competence in which we'll study up, yes, it will be at the beginning of the quarter, flow back both of the wells, it will be accompanying that with the third well to follow. And actually the interesting thing about Winterfell is not just that first phase of development, its subsequent phases. I think it will be ultimately be a much larger resource pool. So it's got not only a short cycle front end to it, but it has that development opportunity to follow-up.

Our next questions come from the line of Subash Chandra with Benchmark Company.

Can you reiterate -- I might have missed it, Tortue volumes, what if any are included in the '24 guide?

Neal, do you want to cover that?

Yes. And so yes, we've got a -- basically, we're assuming it's in line with the detailed guidance that was in the presentation, which is there's some entitlement volumes in 3Q and then close to the full rate in the 4Q, which works out to call it, 2,000 to 3,000 barrels a day of BOEs net with the forecast. So there's not in the full year average. But again, it gets close to full rate within the fourth quarter.

I was just curious, so should we -- is that OpEx included in the guide? I was just confused on the footnote versus the guide for the year?

Yes. So the OpEx, so it's not included in the per barrel metric. So the per barrel is basically on the base business with the OpEx just for the [MS] portion.

The reason we've done that is because in the -- as you go from the project to the operation, there's quite a large commissioning element to that. So that the absolute number includes that transition, the sort of the -- some of the commissioning costs and then the operating costs associated with the field as it comes online.

And finally, I guess, just apples-to-apples for CapEx last year versus the '24 guide, how much cap interest is included?

It's about $25 million a quarter, Subash. So we'd sort of -- if we look at the guidance, sort of we're only assuming it happens in the first half of this year and then goes away in the second half of the year. So interest, hence the $25 million to sort of versus the full year $150 million guide.

And so last year, was that $100 million of cap interest?

Exactly. It's about the same, yes, annualized.

Our next questions come from the line of Matt Cooper with Peel Hunt.

So just firstly, I wonder if you could comment on the current Jubilee production rate and other two wells brought online in 1Q performing per expectations.

Yes, Matt, sort of step back on Jubilee, I think the key points to note are performance in the year will be dependent on two issues. The first is maintenance of the base, which is about voidage replacement. We struggled to do that, really in the third quarter of last year, but really from about sort of November time onwards, we've been injecting water at record levels, and they've been at 100% voidage replacement, probably in the prior three months of that, it was as low as 40% when the water injection was down. So I feel good about the way that the base has been performing as we enter the year and actually have sort of been through the first two months. Then you're sort of adding additional well stock. We've added one water injector and one producer. I think literally, probably today, we're adding the -- second producer will start up. So once that second producer is online, we'll be up at around sort of the 100,000 barrel a day back up above 100,000 -- we're around 100,000. So that's an important milestone for us. Then you've got two more wells to follow. So you've got an additional producer and an additional injector. So as we look to the year and the performance in the year, I think the wells have delivered. We're actually -- when you look at the overall program, the operators would probably deliver the wells six months ahead of time, which is why we're going to take the break and slightly earlier than we'd anticipated to allow us to rebuild that well still. But the fundamental thing to sort of we're focusing on is the water injection and therefore the voidage replacement that sustains the pace.

And just to confirm. So those first two wells, I think you said they went in early 1Q. The injection and the production that you're seeing from those is in line with expectations at the moment?

Yes, it's in line with expectations. And you can -- yes, they're in line with expectations. The base is probably a little bit better than we saw but fundamentally in line with expectations. So then with the second well, second produce starting up now. The objective was to be above that 100,000 barrels a day and that's what we anticipate to be. So yes, it's -- the start of the year has been solid, yes. And the key thing, and I keep bashing on about it, but getting the base properly supported is the key thing that we need to focus on.

Just finally, I just wanted to ask on EG. I wondered how much strip in the infill drilling out reduced 2024 production? Just kind of thinking about how much upside there could be there if you do procure a rig this year? And then kind of the flip side, about how much risk is there that the new rig will be at a higher cost?

Yes. So basically, Neal will come back to the production numbers. Yes, the other contract was probably done at a more advantageous time in the market. So yes, I think we'll probably see a slightly higher rig rate. But again, with all -- I know it tends to be a headline number you look at but you've got to remember that it's a relative, probably 1/3 of the cost of the overall spread rate. So even small, an increment there gets diluted on that basis. And then you've got to figure out how you deliver low NPT. So ultimately, the well costs -- the absolute well costs then go up. So yes, we will see a slightly higher rig cost but it's not something that is ultimately going to interfere with the capital guidance or with the economics of the wells.

then just on the production, yes, the guide we have for EG is around 8,000 barrels a day net for the year, if we sort of drill as planned, we were closer to sort of 11,000. So it's about a 3 million barrel a day impact we can get. Again, I think some of that -- there is some upside if we do end up drilling this year, but that's not included in the base guidance.

Our next questions come from the line of Mark Wilson with Jefferies.

Very clear on the catalyst for this year and the CapEx once you get through Tortue. First of all, just given an idea of the physical work within that $550 million a year and the maintenance split, are you expecting to be -- that we would have for instance an ILX well in the Gulf of Mexico from each year from 2025, given the success you've seen with Winterfell and Tiberius as one part of that CapEx? And also, are you assuming a return of a rig to Jubilee in 2025 and onwards? That's the first question.

So if you sort of conceptualize it yes, if you look at the base and the maintenance of the base, we're looking at three quarters of a rig year in Jubilee. Now clearly, as it were that being sort of rollover. So yes, the rig would return in '25, would maybe drilling '26, and then a break and so on, yes. If you sort of figure it out that there's probably three quarters of a rig year that makes sense, whereas actually this year, we'll have sort of half of a rig year in Ghana. So yes, it does include that. It includes a similar sort of drilling program in Equatorial Guinea going forward, sort of, yes.

Yes, but once every 18 months.

About once every 18 months and maybe a package of sort of three wells. Those are the primary base pieces. Then in the Gulf of Mexico, yes, probably at a sort of 30% working interest sort of one ILX well per year. We sort of run the $20 million or $30 million. That would be in the growth pre sell.

That would be in that $200 million to $250 million of growth versus the $300 million to $350 million in maintenance, which really cover the Jubilee EG and occasionally some GoM maintenance drilling.

And then over to Tortue. I just want to confirm all the physical things for the startup have been discussed. Are there any commercial arrangements to be finalized before those first LNG? And maybe tie into that what are the outcomes or any kind of impact from that? You said that the contractual discussion should -- or debate should be resolved in the middle of the year? Does that -- what should we look at around that?

Yes. So cargo divisions, the timing of the arbitration is around mid-year, decision will be around midyear. The arbitration itself will be held in the second quarter. And typically, you get a ruling sort of a couple of months afterwards, so probably around mid-year. And I think in terms of -- so the -- ultimately, the contractual arrangements aren't going to slow down the completion of the project, actually executing the physical work is the thing that is driving the timeline.

And there was a question on the call, someone asked about Phase 2 potentially coming back into view. Is that -- is there any update worth giving on Tortue Phase 2 versus the other projects in Senegal or a longer-term timeline?

As we've said in the past, Phase 1 is about building out the infrastructure. I think what I would say is there's a real push from the NOCs to find the right next concept for Phase 2 that fully utilizes the infrastructure that's been laid in and that is a new conversation that's occurring now with the NOCs. So partly, on back of the work we're doing on the Yakaar Teranga, both SMH and PETROSEN are interested in seeing how we can accelerate the timeline for Phase 2, it's clearly in the country's interest and actually is the interest of the partnership ahead of the day the BP had previously guided. So that's the conversation that's going on there, Mark.

Thank you. Since there are no further questions at this time, I want to bring the call to a close. Thanks to everyone joining today. You may disconnect your lines at this time and thank you for your participation.