Good morning, and welcome to the Year-End and Fourth Quarter 2018 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Jessica Largent, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Newmont's full year and fourth quarter 2018 earnings conference call. Joining us on the call today are Gary Goldberg, Chief Executive Officer; Nancy Buese, Chief Financial Officer; and Tom Palmer, President and Chief Operating Officer. They will be available to answer questions at the end of the call along with other members of our executive team. Turning to Slide 2, before we go further, please take a moment to review the cautionary statements shown here and refer to our SEC filings, which can be found on our website at newmont.com. Turning to Slide 3, here you will find additional information on the proposed transaction between Newmont and Goldcorp. Our preliminary proxy statement was filed this morning and is also available on our website. Now, I'll hand it over to Gary on Slide 4.

Thanks Jess. Good morning and thank you all for joining this call. Newmont finished the year with a strong fourth quarter as we reached commercial production at Subika Underground delivering another profitable project on time and within budget. But before we get into the details, I want to congratulate our Newmont team for continuing to stay focused on meeting our commitments and for laying the groundwork to lead the Gold sector in profitability and sustainability. Turning to more details on Slide 5. In 2018 Newmont delivered superior operational execution which we demonstrated by producing 5.1 million ounces of gold at all-in sustaining costs of $909 per ounce overcoming geotechnical challenges and the impacts of planned stripping campaigns in North America and Australia generating $640 million in cost and efficiency improvements from our full potential continuous improvement program more than offsetting inflation and bringing total improvements to more than $2 billion since 2013. And advancing our most promising digital initiatives to improve safety, optimize how we mine and process ore, improve process control systems, and monitor mobile equipment health from a centralized base. We also strengthened our global portfolio of long life assets in all four regions. In North America, we completed the Twin Creeks Underground and Northwest Exodus projects extending mine life and adding lower cost production in Nevada. We delivered the Cripple Creek & Victor concentrate project to improve recoveries, and we advanced Long Canyon Phase 2 to feasibility study. In South America, we commissioned a new primary crusher at Merian, mined first gold at Quecher Main ahead of schedule, and declared first reserves at Yanacocha Sulfides. In Australia, we progressed the Tanami Power project to pave the way for a second expansion of this world class asset. In Africa, we reached commercial production at Subika Underground adding higher…

Thanks Gary. Turning to Slide11 for the financial highlights. I'm pleased in place to report strong fourth quarter results consistent with our back half weighting. Compared to the prior-year quarter, we delivered a 6% increase in revenue to more than $2 billion. Adjusted net income of $214 million or $0.40 per diluted share and adjusted EBITDA of $759 million an increase of 5%. Cash from continuing operations was $742 million a slight decrease compared to $748 million last year. Turning to Slide 12 for review of earnings per share in more detail. For the fourth quarter we recorded a small loss in our GAAP net income from continuing operations of $3 million or approximately breakeven. Adjustments for the quarter included $0.08 related to impairments to asset and investments, $0.23 related to valuation allowances and other tax impacts, and $0.09 related to a change in the fair market value of our marketable equity securities portfolio and the impact of reclamation and restructuring charges. Taking these adjustments into account we delivered fourth quarter adjusted net income of $0.40 per diluted share. Turning to our full-year results on Slide 13. Comparing 2018 results to the prior year, our revenues held steady at $7.3 billion despite planned stripping at Boddington and Twin Creeks along with geotechnical headwinds at Carlin and KCGM. We generated net income of $718 million or $1.34 per diluted share, and we delivered adjusted EBITDA of $2.6 billion. Cash from continuing operations was $1.8 million a decrease of approximately $300 million compared to the prior year primarily due to the timing of cash tax payments. And in 2018, we declared dividend of $0.56 per share demonstrating our commitment to shareholder returns. Turning to the full-year adjustments through earnings per share on Slide 14. Here you see the impacts of impairments on…

Thanks Nancy. In 2019 we delivered solid performance across all four regions driven by culture of continuous improvement. As Gary mentioned, our full potential program generated $640 million in cost efficiencies and productivity improvements exceeding our targets and continuing to offset headwinds. I would like to thank all of our teams for demonstrating our commitment to share ideas, and learn from each other success. We are clearly seeing the benefits from this global collaborative approach. Looking forward, we remain excited about advancing several technology initiatives including Smart Mine, advanced process control, and connected worker which will take our performance to the next level. These technology programs are also being applied on a globally consistent basis. Turning to Slide 17. Newmont is anchored in four regions where we have the stability and the proven operating model we need to create value over the long-term. Over the last few years out team has executed on our strategy, and set out up our business for success over the long-term by optimizing portfolio, for the monetization of non-core assets, advancing profitable growth, and adding more than 2 million ounces of gold production at all-in sustaining costs of about $750 per ounce, investing in exploration across the cycle to support a stable production profile with approximately 70% of our production and reserves located in the United States and Australia, and strengthening our balance sheet to provide us financial flexibility. Turning to review of our regional performance starting with North America on Slide 18. The region produced more than 2 million ounces of gold in 2018 at all-in sustaining costs of $928 per ounce. At Carlin geotechnical challenges impacted performance during the year but the site delivered a strong fourth quarter on the back of improving grades at Leeville. The region is advancing work to improve…

Thanks Tom. Turning to Slide 25. In January we announced an agreement to combine with Goldcorp with the vision of creating the world's leading gold business as measured by assets, people, prospects and value. Newmont Goldcorp will operate a world-class portfolio of assets on four continents with the ability to target sustainable and profitable production of between 6 million and 7 million ounces of gold annually and have the benefit of additional revenue of about $1.5 billion from other products including silver, zinc and copper. We will have the sectors best project pipeline and exploration portfolio in terms of both quality and depth, and these prospects translate to the gold sector's largest reserve and resource base with long-term leverage to the gold price. Finally we will continue to have the financial flexibility to execute our capital priorities, deliver sustainable shareholder returns through an industry-leading dividend, and maintain an investment grade balance sheet. We expect the transaction to close in the second quarter following our special stockholder meetings in April and receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals. In the meantime, we're working to ensure a smooth transition and integration as we position the business to deliver industry leading returns for decades to come. Newmont Goldcorp's value proposition is unparalleled. We expect to generate $100 million in annual pretax synergies from G&A savings and a streamlined supply chain, and we plan to achieve additional benefits from the application of our proven full potential continuous improvement program where we have proven we can deliver sustainable cost efficiencies, and productivity improvements of approximately $75 per ounce once fully ramped up. This equates to about $165 million per year combined with the $100 million of annual synergies. These efforts have the potential to deliver more than $2.5 billion in total value creation. Further upside is expected through project optimization and sequencing, asset investments, and an increased and focused investment in exploration potential of these assets. Newmont Goldcorp's operations and project pipeline provides the foundation for steady profitable production, stable cash flow generation and improving costs over the long term and gives a significant optionality and the ability to continue to advance only those projects that meet our minimum hurdle rate of 15% at a $1200 gold price. I recently had the opportunity to visit Red Lake and Musselwhite meeting with more than 600 people in crew meetings at the sites. I'm pleased by the quality of the talent that I met and the future operational potential of these assets. Our teams will be working diligently over the coming weeks to close the transaction and we anticipate providing an update to our 2019 guidance in due course along with a view of our longer-term guidance later this year at our Investor Day. We're very excited about this combination and have clear implementation plans in place to create the world's leading gold business. Thank you for your time. And with that, I'll turn it over to the Operator to open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from John Bridges of JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Many congratulations of the results. Good to see some ounces showing up from the sulfide project in Yanacocha. I was just wondering to what extent is this - the last word and to what extent is the vehicle to attach on these the satellite ore neighboring deposits which looks if they can create nice synergies, how does that work?

I think I’ll start off here and then hand over to Tom. When you look this really just involves our Chaquicocha deposit and part of the Verde deposit which sits off to the side but there's other satellite deposits as you point out John that are not yet included in here because we're doing some additional exploration work. I don’t know Tom if you've got anything to add.

John one of the areas we’re looking at for additional oxide is the - in the Chaquicocha Underground we are seeing some additional oxide that might help serve as a further bridge between oxides and sulfides at Yanacocha. And also share some infrastructure in terms of the underground development at the Chaquicocha Underground. But there is a quite extensive sulfide deposits across that existing operational footprint at Yanacocha. So, our Verde Open Pit Chaquicocha Underground represent Phase 1, but there are some other quite exciting deposits that serve [indiscernible] beyond that Phase 1 stage of the project.

I guess you’re quite busy with other things at the moment but are there any catalyst with respect to in talking to neighbors about working other deposits into the infrastructure you got there, the footprint?

I think that's one that we’re open to John when it comes to going Galeno and Michiquillay and how that might fit with Conga, but I think like we’re looking at with the Goldcorp transaction when is the right time to bring those in and we can look at proper sequencing and how that might work best.

Our next question comes from Matthew Murphy of Barclays. Please go ahead.

I am just wondering with some of the comments on full potential and I guess there is some mention on costs playing a role in some of the reserve reduction. Just interested in what you're seeing generally in the industry on cost inflation and whether you still think you have enough low hanging fruit or potential to take cost out and continue to keep cost flat?

Tom Palmer, here. We are seeing some headwinds say in Australia particular where the iron ore markets heated up so the labor markets warmed up in Australia. So we are seeing attrition a little bit higher, so we’re seeing some headwinds in that area. But our full potential program and the commitment each of our operating General Manager make every year in their planning process is to offset inflation and we have assumptions for inflation building to our planning process to ensure that they have baked into their plans clear projects that can offset inflation as a minimum and then deliver beyond that. And we’ve been out to do that over the last several years, we see it in our plans going forward and we’re confident that we still got a pipeline of projects that can continue to at a minimum offset inflation.

And then just a quick highly specific one, sorry hopefully this doesn't put you on the spot but we're just trying to reconcile the CC&V mill production in Q4. It looked like it was double roughly what would be implied from throughput grade recovery et cetera. Does that have something to do with drawing down stockpiles or something?

That is linked to the concentrates we now produce at CC&V that we had been stockpiling whilst we got our logistics process in place to ship them to Carlin's Mill 6. And we drew down all of those concentrates that we had stockpile through the year. So what you're seeing in the fourth quarter is all of that concentrate we produced through 2018, getting prices through Carlin's Mill 6, at improved recovery then what you would have seen at CC&V's Mill 6 and helping contribute to improve recoveries in Carlin's Mill 6. So that's what you're seeing in those numbers for CC&V in the fourth quarter.

Our next question comes from Chris Terry of Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.

The first one I had is just how we think about the progression of this year. So if the deal is to close in 2Q would you expect that you would then give combined guidance shortly after that for the Company? And would it also include say three to five years out as well or will that take some time. And the second question I had is just around the proxies that are been announced. Just trying to reconcile some of the CapEx numbers that you provided in December and the numbers that are given there for Goldcorp and for Newmont just struggling to square a couple of the numbers. May be you could just step through what's in the proxy CapEx numbers in particular? Thanks.

Couple of things, in regards to guidance what we look to do once we close is to provide an update to 2019 guidance after we've closed and gone through the process to make sure we've got a good understanding of how to properly present because we do look at costs in particular differently than Goldcorp has historically. So we will come out with that guidance. In terms of longer-term guidance, we look to target our Investor Day at the end of the year. Right now we’re looking in either November/December to hold that Investor Day to provide the longer term guidance and outlook for the combined business. In regards to the proxy question, I'd probably need to get more specifics because that’s a backward looking document and it’s not looking forward. So I'm not clear exactly what you want to cover there, but we’re happy if you want to get back to us with the detail on that we can provide it.

Thanks for the color guys. Its more this 2019 and forward CapEx numbers and then free cash flow showing within the business and you take that the forward CapEx numbers for Newmont, they look higher than the numbers given in the December CapEx numbers. So I am just trying to work out the forward CapEx reconciliation?

Yes Chris. The proxy is really mostly backward looking so probably the best thing to do is take the Newmont guidance that we gave you in December period assume for the Newmont that stays the same for now. And then let us give you more information after the transaction closes relative to the Goldcorp spend and assets. I think that will be the best way to put things together for 2019 and then certainly we’ll give you the full view. We want to make sure we reconcile all the components there is significant differences between the way the two companies have reported and we want to get that very right before we make that public. So give us a little bit of time but post closing will give you a clear view on 2019 numbers at least.

And the last one from me, just in terms of the updated guidance and what we should expect. If you back out any potential divestments that might occur from the existing assets on the Newmont side, would we expect the Newmont guidance would stay the same as in for the existing assets?

At this stage we wouldn't be projecting any asset sales. I think that's something that we typically don't hang the- for sale sign out there. So clearly we’re going to go through a process like we've done with Newmont over the last five years where we assess all of our assets both operating assets and projects and the value versus risk basis and go through in detail making sure we understand what their full potential is before we move forward. So at this stage especially for the 2019 guidance that we provide in due course after close, I wouldn't anticipate seeing any asset sales in there.

[Operator Instructions] And our next question will come from Anita Soni of CIBC. Please go ahead.

My question is with regards again to the proxy just little bit more on this free cash flow projections. I realize it’s a backward looking document but can I understand what kind of assumptions you used for stock for the Goldcorp side of the equation, what gold price were you assuming and also does your projections for free cash flow reflect the 2.2 million to 2.4 million guidance, 1 million ounce guidance that they put out and the further implications of that?

Yes, so in terms of projections for the Goldcorp piece they use a $1300 long-term gold price and so that’s what we have baked in. So that’s sort of the baseline. And then I guess your question about cash flows, again this is all just based on the initial modeling and the basics from an accounting point of view. So if there's further details on that, you're trying to get to let us help you try to work through because they're meant to give a view, but again this is a preliminary review of accounting valuation based on the business model and a deal model. We still have additional work to do. The evaluation itself will change up to and including the date of closing.

Right, no I understand there is going to be differences in cost but the CapEx and revenue seems like it should be pretty straightforward. And then on your side of the equation on Newmont and I think this is what Chris is driving at, the prior guidance that you guys have put out was around about - and I hesitate to say guidance but if you add the two, the guidance of about 500 million to 600 million that's in the chart. And then also in another chart says 500 million of ongoing development capital. So to get you to about 1 billion, whereas the proxy is saying in some years it's 1.2 to 1.3 for you. So I'm just curious as to what precipitated that increase in CapEx?

Yes again, kind of coming back to the basis of the proxy. That is not guidance that's provided in there. So when you see the spend numbers relative to capital, I wouldn't translate that to guidance. Let us give that to you once we actually get closed because it's really an accounting view based on a model and we haven't gotten - let us do the work to give you proper guidance about spend.

Thank you. So you said it was $1,300 growth for Goldcorp sided equation, what did you use for yours?

$1,200.

$1,200 for yours? Okay. All right. Thank you very much.

Anita maybe just as we get the next call and just to give some high level numbers, we're talking of targeting 6 million to 7 million ounces out into the future - the foreseeable future. What we see here over the next five years is a roughly $800 million a year in development costs on a combined basis and roughly about $1 billion a year on sustaining capital. So that total is kind of a high level. We'll have to get into the details and we'll give much more detail as we get into providing guidance near the end of the year with the Investor Day.

Our next question comes from Tanya Jakusconek of Scotiabank. Please go ahead.

Just may be a question for Tom, just coming back to the reserves. Tom, can you give us a little bit more details on the 3.6 million ounce revision that happened between Phoenix and Gold Quarry, I guess Carlin and what exactly happened there?

At Phoenix, more infill drilling allowed us to improve our resource models and get better reconciliations between the model and what we're mining and processing. So it was really a process of continuing to refine and optimize their models through infill drilling and then making those adjustments so that we have more reliability and predictability in terms of what we have in the ground and what we actually produce through the plant. So the prices are continuing to tidy up and improve those models at Phoenix. And at Carlin, two laybacks in the Gold Quarry pit, that as we got to the point in that planning processes we were optimizing those laybacks, we were able to improve the performance of one of the laybacks and actually pull ounces out of one of the laybacks, by adding the second layback into the first layback. So improved one layback but that led to the other layback becoming uneconomic in terms of our reserves requirements and so it pushed out. So it's really about that Carlin going through that stage of mine planning and doing the optimization on the next phase as layback's coming through.

And at Phoenix, the improved reconciliation that you did with the infill drilling, did you just find that these ounces just were not there?

Some of that is a complex multi metal ore body. So as you get in and do your drilling, it's about getting better confidence about what's in the ground between the fortitude and bonanza pits and it was a process as we start to do the additional drilling and bring that drilling into the resource model and then bring that into our mine plants that got better confidence in that material. So there's some metal that we previously thought was there that that wasn't there, some metal moves into resource whilst we do more work.

What sort of drill phasing did you use? We can take it offline. That's fine.

Sounds like a good idea Tanya.

Our next question comes from Michael Dudas of Vertical Research Partners. Please go ahead.

Three quick ones. First, like 2018 you had more second-half weighted results, can you comment a bit about how that's going to pull through for 2019? Secondly, as you're combining the best of the best, you're going through the analysis of the merger with Goldcorp; given your development projects right now, is there any change to the timing currently and is that still kind of get [indiscernible] bring everything else on board? And third, you mentioned your Musselwhite and Red Lake business. Have Gary or Tom, have you've been to all the major operations yet with the Goldcorp any other maybe color that you received or what you're expecting to find as you finish up? Thank you.

I'll have Tom start with the 2018 to 2019 comparisons.

Our 2019 might be as heavily weighted to the fourth quarter as 2018 was. We had a Tanami, Merian, Ahafo, CC&V, and Carlin, all fourth quarters that were heavily weighted in 2018. There will be a slight waiting to the second-half and fourth quarter mainly around the Ahafo mill expansion coming on stream in the second half of 2019. So we'll see increased volume come through and somewhat into the second half and into the fourth quarter. But not the same level that you saw in 2018.

I think then moving on in terms of as we go through both in terms of project sequencing but more specifically going through and assessing talent and getting to a position to be able to name the senior leaders of the new company. We're going through a very detailed process between Tom and I with a number of meetings with the Goldcorp team and with our own team as we go through that process. Look to have that in a position that by the time we get to close that we're able to name essentially the senior leadership team across the combined Newmont Goldcorp organization. So working through that a very detailed rigorous process, and one that's wanting to make sure we get to meet the people and take the proper amount of time as we go through this process. I think on your last question I did have the opportunity to visit Musselwhite and Red Lake last week and I didn't mention that it was a little cold up there too but that's beside the point. We have - as we've done our due-diligence across the entire business and portfolio, had the opportunity to go to everyone of the operating sites, and as well as had detailed discussions around all the projects and we continue to go through - I look forward to and Tom does as well to get around to visit all the sites in due course but that won't happen here over the next couple of weeks. That'll be over the next several months as we work through that process.

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Gary Goldberg, for closing remarks.

Thank you for joining our call this morning. We're pleased with our performance in 2018. But as always, our commitment is to take it to the next level by delivering steady gold production at competitive costs, continuing to invest in the next generation of mines, leaders, and technology; and staying ahead of the pack in terms of the value we create and the standards we uphold. Thank you for joining us and have a safe day.

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