Good morning, and welcome to the Newmont Mining Fourth Quarter and Full Year Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Today's conference is being recorded. If you have any objections, please disconnect at this time. And now I'd like to turn today's conference over to Mr. John Seaberg, Vice President of Investor Relations for Newmont Mining Corporation. Thank you.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Newmont's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2011 Earnings Conference Call. Joining us today are Richard O'Brien, President and Chief Executive Officer, and other members of our executive leadership team. Before we begin this morning, I'd like to refer you to our cautionary statement on Slide 2 as we will be discussing forward-looking information, which is subject to a number of risks, as further described in our SEC filings, which can be found on our website at newmont.com. And now I'll turn the call over to Richard.

Thanks, John. For those of you on the webcast, we'll begin on Slide 3. 2011 was another step in the transformation of our company as we built upon the strong foundation of our core operating regions and defined the next phase of our evolution. We are continuing to make progress on the strategy we discussed with you at April Investor Day last year. We discussed delivering competitive growth and returns, unlocking our exploration upside, maintaining a strong balance sheet and returning capital to our shareholders through a gold-linked dividend. And while strategy sets the future, execution sets the base. So as we've been saying since 2007, everything at Newmont begins with execution. Good performance in our operations allows us to do many things. And in 2011, we delivered again on our original expectation and outlook for the year. Gary Goldberg will talk more about that in a moment. Also in 2011, we took tangible steps to move our project pipeline forward. In particular, we announced initiation of construction at Akyem in Ghana, Conga in Peru and the Tanami shaft in Australia, which Guy Lansdown will speak to later in the presentation. And as we have said, competitive returns do require capital discipline. And from time to time, this means that not every project makes it to the next stage of development, and Hope Bay is such a project. And Russell will speak about the financial statement impacts of removing Hope Bay from our development pipeline later in the presentation. With respect to the exploration upside, we had a successful year and delivered on our exploration program. As you saw yesterday, we announced year-end reserves of 99 million ounces of gold and nearly 10 billion pounds of copper. To put this in perspective, by year-end 2011, with 5.3 million ounces of…

Thanks, Richard, and good day, everyone. As you can see on Slide 5, a lot of numbers for the fourth quarter and the year, and I will touch on some of the highlights, with a focus on the full year numbers since these are more reflective of the long-term nature of our business. For 2011, we generated record revenue of $10.4 billion; adjusted net income of $2.2 billion or about approximately $4.39 a share; and record operating cash flow of $3.6 billion, clearly benefiting from continued delivery and execution of the business plan and a strong gold price environment. Gold operating margins increased 32% to $971 an ounce despite a 22% increase in operating costs. As outlined at our Investor Day last April, the operating cash flow has been and continues to be redeployed back in the core gold business through aggressive development of our project pipeline and through the cash acquisition of Fronteer Gold last April, an acquisition that I believe will add significant long-term value for our shareholders, to fund increased near-mine and greenfield exploration. And as Richard mentioned, in line with our gold price-linked dividend, we returned $1 a share or approximately $500 million to our shareholders last year. In addition, we have significantly deleveraged the balance sheet over the past 26 months, with debt repayments of $430 million in 2010, $265 million in 2011, and as described in the subsequent event note in our recently filed Form 10-K, almost $800 million in the first 2 months of this year. We continue to evaluate our capital structure. And with net debt at year end of only $2.5 billion and a liquid marketable securities portfolio with approximately $1.5 billion at year end, we have significant flexibility to add long-term debt without impacting our current investment-grade ratings, especially in…

Thanks, Russell. I'm really excited to be here. I've been following Richard and the team and the direction that Newmont's been taking, and I was attracted by Newmont's good reputation, focus on sustainable development and value creation. It's been a very busy last 3 months. I visited most of the operations and most of the major projects across the globe, and we've got fantastic assets, great people and some good opportunity across the group. I bring a passion for safety, which is shared across the business. Despite this good focus, we did, unfortunately, have 5 people from our workforce and contractors lose their life in 2011 and clearly, this is not acceptable. I'll be working with the team to accelerate our safety improvement efforts going forward in 2012. On Slide 11. Comparing Newmont's production and cost profile from 2010 to 2011, the power of the portfolio is evident. As Russell mentioned earlier, while year-over-year production was down about 4%, results were in line with our outlook as production from North America and Africa offset anticipated declines in South America and Asia Pacific. From a cost standpoint, the largest impacts were also felt in our South America and Asia Pacific regions. Again, this performance was anticipated and included in our outlook as we expected lower production in both of these regions. And in particular, we expected Asia Pacific's cost to reflect the processing of stockpiled ore at Batu Hijau as we transition from mining and processing Phase 5 ore in 2010 to stripping Phase 6 and processing lower-grade stockpiles in 2012 and 2013. For a detailed discussion of mine-by-mine performance, please see yesterday's release and 10-K. For this morning's call, I'd like to focus my regional remarks on key drivers of production and cost in 2011. Turning to Slide 12. Our…

Thank you, Gary, and good day. Here on Slide 17, we've summarized our 2011 gold exploration results. We are really excited to have added about 12 million ounces in 2011 to achieve a record gold proven and probable reserve base of around 99 million ounces, a net increase of about 6% over last year. In addition, we grew our gold NRM by about 12% in 2011, while increasing gold in our earlier-stage resource categories. To deliver these results, we employed 125 drill rigs and drilled approximately 1.3 million meters to deliver our fourth consecutive year of reserve increases for gold and copper. 2012 exploration priorities include Long Canyon, Leeville, Carlin, Mike, Phoenix and Fiberline in Nevada. Supporting the development of a new district in the Guiana Shield in South America, we are conducting extensive development infill drilling at the Merian project in Suriname, with the aim of adding reserves in 2012 -- of adding NRM in 2012. Follow-up drill programs at the nearby Sabajo project are coming up with promising results. In the Asia Pacific region, we plan to build on our 2011 success at the Callie underground mine in the Tanami and at KCGM operations, while Jundee and Waihi drill programs should continue to add new underground mine life from surface and underground drill programs. Each of these sites have great exploration potential that we plan to continue aggressively testing in 2012. Meanwhile, in Africa, drill programs successfully expanded the wingspan of early-stage Subika underground mineralization, and we began drilling extensions of the Apensu open pits. Early-stage activity around Ahafo North demonstrated potential for additional open pit and underground mineralization near the existing reserve. Drill programs at Akyem suggest potential for underground mineralization. We will continue with these programs in 2012 as we expand our exploration efforts in Ghana.…

Thanks, Guy. I'll conclude by reiterating our commitment to delivering shareholder value through execution on the 5 components of our strategy. We will pursue growth but not growth at any cost, and it will be growth that delivers competitive returns. Our 2011 performance affirms that Newmont will continue to execute on its operating base, continue to realize its exploration potential and continue to build competitive projects that deliver competitive returns. And finally, by maintaining a strong balance sheet and generating robust operating cash flows, we will remain a unique investment platform because we can return capital to shareholders while providing competitive growth, delivering ounces which produce current cash flow and allow us to continue to drive the business forward, both for today and for the future. So combined, these components provide a powerful and compelling value proposition that we believe truly differentiate this company and position us for the future. So with that, we'll be happy to take your questions and thanks for listening.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question from John Bridges, JPMorgan. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Just wondered, the cash has gone down this year. You've got this commitment to a dividend now, which is obviously working very well for you. I just wondered if Russ was going to duck into his piggy bank to maintain it going forward.

John, it's Russ. Yes, the cash was down. And I'd just like to remind people, we did pay cash for the Fronteer acquisition in April, $2.2 billion, because we didn't want to dilute our shareholders, knowing this was a long-term exploration plan. And as I mentioned earlier, we have deleveraged the balance sheet significantly over the last couple of years. And in today's interest rate environment, we are looking at an opportunity to answer at some [ph] long-term debt. And we are pretty conservatively geared, if you look at the financial metrics, and have plenty of flexibility. But you've seen the cash flow generation capacity of the existing assets. And in this gold price environment, we're blessed with that attribute. As Richard said, strong balance sheet, strong operating cash flows, we can fund the growth, the dividend and continue the investment in exploration off of our current business plans. So a great position to be in, John. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay, so you're confident and that's nice to hear. And then maybe an operating question. It's probably a bit unfair given your short tenure there, but Boddington is on a run rate for 800,000 ounces a year. Could you talk a little bit about the progress with fixing up the plant and what you think it's capable of now?

Gary here. John, the guidance is for 750,000, just to be clear, looking out for the next couple of years. And having visited there just 1.5 weeks ago, the work that's been done to upgrade and improve the conveyors, which was one of the bottlenecks that we had, is going to be completed later this quarter. And the team there and the work that's been done all looks in line to be able to achieve the 750,000 guidance that we've given. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Did you say -- I thought it was 750,000 to 800,000?

I'm sorry. 750,000 to 800,000. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Right. Okay, cool. And if I might slip one last little one in, maybe. I see you've got a big inferred number there for Yanacocha now. Is that the sulfides that are beginning to come into play?

John, this is Guy. Yes, I believe that's where the bulk of the inferred material will be coming in.

Next question from Jorge Beristain, Deutsche Bank.

Jorge with Deutsche Bank. I guess my first question is for Richard. Again, just following up on the Conga update that you gave us. What is the next key date as to when you expect that sign-off from the committee on the EIS?

So Jorge, what we've been told is that from the time that the committee began its work was going to be 40 days for them to conclude their work. What we don't know is, at the time when that comes out, how long the government is going to want to review that outcome and when we'll find that out. So I would expect it's going to be at least 40 days from the time period when that was announced. We're hopeful that it's not an extended period beyond that 40 days, but we don't really know. So in the meantime, we continue to work at the site with the government just to ensure that things are maintained throughout the wet period as best we can. We continue to work on engineering and we continue to keep our project team together, while at the same time, Ramzi and Guy have worked hard to reduce current costs at Conga. So I think the best that we can do at this point is do everything we can to be flexible, be ready to go and be responsive to the government when the results of that EIA review come out.

Okay. But some of the nature of the opposition to the project seems to be grassroots and related to -- I mean, could there be a worse-case scenario where you do get a clean bill of health on the EIS and the government signs off quickly, but then there's still another local round of opposition?

Yes, so remember, I'm the CEO of a mining company. I'm not a politician, so what I have to say is just from my standpoint. But the Conga Project, I believe, is a well positioned, well studied project with a well-thought-out and, I believe, well planned EIA. I think we are doing everything we can to ensure that, that project moves forward. What happens in Peru, I really can't tell you what's going to happen in Peru. All I can tell you is that the president has spoken about the government support for Conga. And as you point out, there are regional politicians who have been opposed to Conga. How they settle that dispute, I don't know. All I can tell you is we commit that around the communities most closely to Conga, we're working very closely with those people. We want to embrace the fact that if there are reasonable changes that need to be made, we will make those, to make sure that we try as best we can to respond to any community concerns. We can't settle political disputes, but we will work hard to do everything in our power to make this go forward.

Okay, great. And if I can just squeeze a second quick question in to Guy. Just at Long Canyon, you said you'll have an NRM by the end of this year. Could you just kind of update us as to what you're looking at in terms of a conceptual resource size there at this point?

If you'll recall, the target case was of the order of 2 million ounces. And we're obviously hoping to achieve as much of that as we can. We still got drilling underway. We still got steady work underway. We still got modeling we've got to do, but that's what we will be targeting.

Our next question from Patrick Chidley, HSBC.

Just a follow-up on Long Canyon. Guy, did you say 2 million ounces or 10 million ounces?

I wish it was 10 million ounces, Patrick. Sorry, the targets that we hedged at the time of doing the acquisition, the base case was 2 million ounces. The drilling work that we've done, the study work that we've done, that we will undertake, we'll be targeting 2 million ounces -- up to 2 million ounces for conversion to NRM later this year. So that is 2 million ounces.

Yes, just to be clear on that, Patrick, what Guy said is 2 million ounces for NRM. That was the original plan that we saw at the time of acquisition. We also mentioned, though, that we saw a considerable upside over time. And at the time, we talked about the potential for up to 8 million ounces. What Guy is saying is not all of that is going to come in this year. We're going to continue that drilling program, and this is step one and in Phase 1 of what we expect to be a long-term development option here, which will provide us with considerable upside. That's what we said at the time of the acquisition. We still believe that, through all the exploration results we have today.

All right. But Fronteer had already outlined 2.3 million ounces, I think. Is that in addition to the 2 million ounces, you mean?

No, Pat, that's just 2 million ounces total of NRM that we'd be looking at bringing in. The numbers that were around or of the order of 2 million, I think, the Fronteer number was 2.3 million. We saw...

So it would be a confirmation of their numbers?

Yes, that's correct.

Patrick, it's Randy. I think that's absolutely what we're trying to say, the confirmation in the year 2012 of what was originally in the Fronteer numbers. And then, as Richard pointed out, we -- when we made the acquisition, we had anticipated considerably greater than that total amount over time. But what our question was trying to address was what we expect in 2012.

So basically trying to take what was a potential resource that was working for Fronteer, and they had not yet declared yet to NRM a higher standard of potential definition throughout 2011. And the work we're doing in 2012, bring what they had as a hope to the reality of NRM, and we're doing that throughout 2012. And then we'll continue to bring that into reserve, as well as bring what we see as potential resource into NRM in future years. And with that, we still have the full expectation that we'll see 8 million ounces. That's what we see today. It's still early days, but confirmatory drilling continues to keep that right in front of us. So I'd say the acquisition case is good or better than what we had in place at the time.

And then just a follow-ups also on your exploration programs. Can you outline what work went on last year in Nevada at Mike and Fiberline and the Greater Gold Quarry, and how that might play out this year?

Yes, Patrick, what I'm going to do is ask Grigore Simon, our Vice President of Exploration, to talk a bit about that. And I did want him to address the question from John Bridges earlier around the inferred material at Yanacocha.

So I am going to address first John's question then. Most of the inferred material that the question referred to is coming from Conga, to be precise. To follow up on the question on Long Canyon, Patrick, that you had and the rest of Nevada, at Long Canyon, I think, you got the message that we are confident that we will deliver on the target case that we mentioned and look at this NRM as the very first step to get there. Going to Mike and Fiberline, what we have done is, we are still in the scoping study there, so we have done quite a lot of drilling in preparation for moving and advancing actually these ounces to an NRM category. So the programs remain on track. We are spending money on both, and we are dealing them both. And they look actually quite good. As far as Gold Quarry is concerned, Gold Quarry is going to deliver ounces for years to come. Just to give you an example, in the reserves program this year, Gold Quarry had the significant contribution again. It's almost 800,000 ounces just from pit expansions. If you look into the NRM, again, Gold Quarry came with significant ounces as part of the Phase 8. We expect to bring more reserves next year. So I will say that overall, all Nevada programs actually are very vibrant.

Very good. I hope to continue to hear more about those programs through the year and what the progress is toward that scoping study on Mike, in particular. And then one final thing, I just wanted to ask if -- is the appropriate strip ratios for the new reserves, is that available in the 10-Q? Or if not, will you provide it, please?

Yes, it's in the reserve -- Patrick, it's Russ. It's in the reserve table in the 10-K. You can see the ore and the recovery and the strip ratio.

Next question from Mike Jalonen with Bank of America.

I guess, not to beat a dead horse, just on Long Canyon, Guy, what's the strike extent that you'll have there for that 2 million ounce target? And then a second question I'll have, what's the long-term plan for Hope Bay? Is that going to be vented out eventually?

Let me talk about Hope Bay, while Grigore sorts through the extension question. At Hope Bay, what we're doing right now is putting it on care and maintenance, working with the local community and the government. And while we have some other potential options, we're not ready to talk about them at this time. What I would say, Mike, is that it's clear that there is gold at Hope Bay. How to recover it in an economic project is something that we believe, over time, could happen, and we'll continue to hold that possibility for us. As Russ said, though, to be precise where we are today, it's not in our development project pipeline. And with that, then we've taken off the amounts on the books so that we have some flexibility going forward, and we'll keep you posted as to what we do. So Grigore?

Thank you, Richard. The current footprint of the mineralization at Long Canyon is somewhere in the range of 800 meters to 1,000 meters. And as you -- as we have already mentioned, we managed to extend the footprint of that mineralization overall by about 25%. So to give you a sense in meters, it's about 450 meters extension to the north. And to the south, actually we are adding again about a few hundred meters. But please keep in mind that we are still early stage here. We have been there for almost a year now, and we really try to confirm the resource first before we were actually able to do any expansion drilling. At the same time, as you are probably aware, we had some permit limitations there in terms of the amount of exploration that we can do in the district, pending the extensions. Now we have secured these permits last year, and we expect this year to show much more district exploration.

And just to build on that, one way to look at the confidence we have in the Hope Bay or -- sorry, in Long Canyon, is that we've actually -- as Guy said, we're getting ready to file our plan of operations. We've moved that up in our time frame by about 3 to 6 months, and that plan of operations is the first step in getting our permit to actually mine there. So we're actually moving very quickly to put this into both operations, while we continue to explore in the district. And what that says is that we're confident that we have enough material through our existing exploration program to go put a plan of operation in place, to get ready to permit that while at the same time, as Grigore said, moving outside, looking at extensions and seeing how far it goes. So I think what you can read into that is that we're pretty, pretty positive about where things stand at Long Canyon.

Patrick, it's Russ. I just wanted to go back and correct. We have the tons -- ore tons and recovery. I'll ask John's group and I'll work with them to get the strip ratios up, and we'll put it on the website so that people can go in there and model it, to the best of our knowledge anyway.

Our next question from Paretosh Misra, Morgan Stanley.

So you mentioned capital discipline as a central part of your strategy. So could putting some sort of maximum limit on CapEx be also considered?

Sorry, I think the question was, would we consider putting a maximum limit on CapEx? And we consider, obviously, our ability to fund ongoing exploration. And capital does come in 2 forms in the sense of new projects, expansion capital and also sustaining capital. And we balance that investment with our expectations around gold price and the balance sheet strength. I'll say that if a project is delivering strong economic returns, we will find a way to fund it. Probably more of an issue for us, quite frankly, in this environment is finding the human capital to build it. So the balance sheet is obviously something we do spend a lot of time looking at. But in this positive environment, we can fund a number of projects. Getting the people and keeping the people to fund and to build those projects is probably the biggest challenge right now.

Understood. And then maybe just one more. How much of this Conga CapEx you will need to spend, should you decide to not proceed with the project this year?

If we don't get the positive nod from the EIA, we have probably $600 million of capital right now that's planned, and I think we'll look at every dollar of that if we don't proceed with this, this year. There will be some ongoing remediation at the site when the dry season comes on us and we'll continue to work through that, but that will be a small portion of that capital. So we'll just keep you apprised as we see, going forward. In the meantime, we'll complete engineering. That's the only thing we really have planned at the moment as we were already demobilizing a lot of the other equipment at the site, preparing to come back when we hear about the EIA, so trying to minimize those costs but be ready to go. As I said, be flexible, be ready to go.

Our next question from Dave Hove, Stifel, Nicolaus. Dave Hove - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: Richard, just wanted to ask you, recently, we've seen on the news on Ghana that they're starting to review stabilization agreements. And also in Indonesia, that they are -- that in Indonesia that they're going to start to review your contract of work. What sort of impact do you think it would have on Newmont?

Yes, it's a great question. And what I would say is that we have really been on notification in both countries for some time that the governments want to renegotiate. In both countries, we have -- in the one, Ghana, we have a parliamentarily approved, if that's such a word, stabilization agreement. And in the other, Indonesia, we have a contract to work. And we have indicated to both governments that, of course, we'll be flexible within reason. And that while renegotiation from their standpoint might look like higher royalties or higher taxes, that there are other components of a renegotiation, which are things on our side that allow us to do things that we need to do as well. So what I would say is the impact on Newmont at the present time, we could expect that a higher royalty might take place in both of those countries, or taxes. But I would expect that on balance, it will not be material to the company, and that as we find anything out in those -- which have both been on the table for some time and we have not seen any conclusions on either one, so I can't really give you a precise number because we don't have one. But what I can tell you is when we do, we'll let you know. We just want to make sure that people know that in this environment -- and you see it across the world. It's not just Newmont, it's not just Ghana. I think that governments and communities are demanding their fair share of mining projects, particularly in this bull market environment that we've seen over the last couple of years. I think that we have to be responsive. We have to be responsible, but what that means is that we have to be responsible to all stakeholders. It's not just about what communities want or the government wants or what our shareholders need. It's a combination to make sure that we can continue to sustain the business, and that's the way we address these negotiations. We have certain rights, but we also have certain obligations in every one of these countries. Dave Hove - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: Right. And as a follow-up question on that, you saw that Elang is one of the projects which you talked about obviously [ph] . And with Indonesia planning on banning the exporting of unprocessed ore in 2014, they say, so what are the impacts on your plans with Elang based on that?

That's also a good question. And again, I would suggest to you that my recent discussions with the government of Indonesia, prior discussions, I think Indonesia is trying to ensure, like a lot of countries, that they get the most out of not just the mining but also the mining and beneficiation of the resources owned by the country. How to get the most out of that, I think, is still to come. And while that certainly is a law that the Indonesians have proposed, I think they are still working through, and we're trying to help them work through, what the exact impact of that is. And I would tell you this, that if we go forward with Elang, we're going to have to do so along with the Indonesian government, because we're going to need to get permits. And we will work with them closely to ensure that what we want to do, putting money in the ground for Elang, putting money on top of the ground for processing and equipment, combining that with our Batu Hijau operations -- before we invest significant capital in that kind of project, we are going to ensure that we have the right arrangement that will allow us, the government and the communities to all benefit from our activities going forward. And we don't have all of that in place today, nor would I suggest to you does the government. So what I would say is, while they want to continue to have foreign direct investment in Indonesia -- they have to have that to support their growth, I don't think they have the exact formula. They have pieces of what they want, but they're going to have to work with us to make sure that those pieces comport with what we need. So at this point, what I'd tell you is, we have good exploration potential in front of us. We have some negotiations in front of us, and we'll see how things come out.

Our last question from John Tumazos, Independent Research.

I may be confused by some reports in the press, and forgive me for expressing the concern. I believe it was Mineweb that reported that part of the negotiation for Conga was a commitment that Newmont would guarantee a minimum of $2 billion in tax revenues. Was that report correct? And if you have to guarantee a certain threshold of tax payments before you earn the money, under U.S. accounting, would that show up on commitments and contingencies on the balance sheet?

Let me take that, John. I'll start with the second question, which is we didn't commit to anything, so we're not going to report anything. I don't know what the standard is. But I'm pretty sure if we committed it, we would have to disclose that kind of contingency. But there's no way, if there was such a report, that, that's true. Obviously, we will pay the taxes that are due when they're due, and we'll pay them under the current regulations or how they change over time. But there are no minimums that we would commit to, nor have we committed to anything. So sorry you read that, but it didn't come from us.

If I could follow up. In addition to the NGOs, a particular issue -- and your guys have been working there 20 years, they're well aware, some of the indigenous people in northern Peru don't accept the government in Lima as legitimate. Now they think they were there before Pizarro. So if you encounter these local issues like roadblocks, et cetera, how do you work around the diversity of political opinion in the country?

Well, as I said, John, I think that we're not politicians, but what we are is we have a lot of relations with people in the community. We have been working in that community since really early exploration activities took place in Conga, probably 10 years ago. As a result of that, we do try to stay plugged into what's important to those people. It's an agrarian community. As you point out, there's a lot of history there. I think the roadblocks come from a number of different parameters. They come from politicians. They come from local citizens who are concerned about water and jobs. And I think with respect to each of those categories, we provide what we provide, which is we provide a resource base. We can develop it. We can put people to work. We can provide taxes. And in this case, we can take water, which at the moment is not consumable, and we can turn it into something which is and which is more sustainable over time and which is more predictable, less seasonal. So I think we can provide what the community needs. And how politicians and others accept that is up to them. We can only do what we can do. Well, with that, John, thanks for your questions, and thanks to everybody else for your attendance on the call. We really appreciate your attendance and interest, and thanks for joining us today.

This concludes today's conference. Thank you for your participation. You may disconnect at this time. Again, today's conference has concluded. Please disconnect at this time, and thank you for your participation.