Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Osisko Gold Royalties Q4 and Full-Year 2021 Results Conference Call. After the presentation we will conduct a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions]. Today on the call we have Mr. Sandeep Singh, President and Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Frederic Ruel, Chief Financial Officer and Vice President Finance. I would now like to turn the meeting over to our host for today's call, Mr. Sandeep Singh. [Foreign Language]

Thanks very much, Operator. Hopefully you can hear me okay. And thanks, everyone, for joining us this morning. I know it's a busy end for the week; a lot of people reporting, so thanks for taking the time. We'll try to go through the prepared materials reasonably quickly, leave enough time for questions. And please note if you don't already have it, the deck that I'll be walking through with Fred is on the website and we will be making forward-looking statements as we talk through it. Jumping to Slide 3, just in terms of a very high level recap, we had another exceptionally strong quarter. Our assets continue to perform well, and provide significant catalysts that are playing out, which will touch on some of them as we go through the document. But in 2021 80,000 GEOs earned gold equivalent ounces, as you know, that was pre -released. That includes contributions from Renard, which again, we will talk about later as coming back online this year, resulting in record revenues of just sigh of $200 million Canadian record operating cash flows as well. This year, we expect significantly more ounces. We'll still have a very high and frankly peer-leading margin at around 93% that coupled with still a strong gold price here today, certainly volatile, but higher than the $1,800 an ounce we average in 2021. Should lead, we expect to continue to records on a number of fronts. There was a little bit of noise in the financials, mainly resulting -- stemming from a non-cash impairment in Osisko Development of the tune of $48 million in the quarter. But really, those were legacy assets in the James Bay Area accrue loan and in Guerrero. So exploration stage assets of the company is not focusing on -- and feltis…

Thank you for Sandeep [Indiscernible] Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. As discussed by Sandeep, 2021 was a very good year for us in line with our expectations. We have met our guidance with strong deliveries from our partners, despite some challenges with COVID for some operators. And our results have led again to record revenues, cash margins, and operating cash flows from our royalties and streams business. If we go to page 15 of the presentation, we recorded record revenues of 199.6 million in 2021 compared to a 156.6 million in 2020. Cash flows from operating activities were 106 million on the consolidated basis. For the royalties and streams segment alone, cash flows from operations have reached a record $153 million compared $214 million in 2021. On Page 16, we present a summary of our net loss and adjusted earnings. The consolidated net loss to Osisko shareholders was $23.6 million or $0.14 per share compared to net earnings of $16.9 million or $0.10 per share in 2020. The consolidated net loss was due to non-cash impairment charges and mining operating expenses incurred by Osisko Development in 2021. On a consolidated basis, adjusted earnings were $59 million or $0.35 per share, comprised of adjusted earnings of $94 million or $0.56 per share for the Royalties and Streams segment. And an adjusted loss of $35 million from Osisko Development or $0.21 per share. On Page 17, we have a summary of our quarterly results with additional details for the royalties and streams segment, including 19,830 GEOs in Q4 for a total of 80,000 GEOs in 2021. We generated gross profit of $35 million in Q4 to end the year at $139 million compared to $104 million in 2020. Operating cash flow was up $35.1 million, were generated in…

Thanks a lot, Fred. And I think we can forgo the closing remarks and Operator open it up for Q&A list.

[Operator Instructions] we’ll pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. [Foreign Language] [Operator Instructions]. And we do have a question from Mike Gentleman, from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi Sandeep, Sean and everyone. Sandeep. I was just wondering with the -- when [Indiscernible] with Northern Star now participating as a joint venture partner and [Indiscernible] [Indiscernible] was on [Indiscernible] saying that he's going to builder on the [Indiscernible]. Was this potential for a streaming deal to finance, to help financial project for Osisko Gold Royalties?

Hi Mike, good morning. Certainly even before and certainly after that announcement, the team there at Osisko Mining can build this mine themselves. They are certainly capable of it. In terms of -- and then they [Indiscernible] wealth of our ways, make theirs. John has always been quite prolific from a funding perspective, he has, a lot of equity or the cash in the balance sheet, the number obviously will come into focus with the feasibility study later this year. You had a lot of opportunities in which we can go short answer to your question is, I certainly hope so, but I'm not going to hold my breath either. I think there's a lot of potential for John to fund that through the equity as more equity debt, etc, if stream comes into focus there certainly we'll be eager, it’s a pretty exceptional asset, and certainly, we trust the team that's currently pushing it forward. So too early to tell, I guess, Mike, but no shortage of options for them as they move forward.

Okay, thanks. Second question going to Canada Malartic. On the Yamana call, they said there's potential for a second shaft on a project. Also, I guess to the East, as you know, mineral -- you can see it on your slide, mineralization plunging to the east. And just wondering, what do you think of that? That should be positive for your royalty. More production.

I like it. This might be the only conversation I guess I missed. That's my bad but I usually do mention that. What I was trying to guide to is just that. This year we expect the ounces to grow significantly over the course of this year; last year, the focus was infill drilling. There wasn't enough extension drilling closely enough to add to those ounces. We think gold will complete that exercise. When you think about the infill drilling, it's going to unlock more of the resources that currently are in the mine plan. And remember, there are only half of the current resources are on the mine plan, less than half now. And then, so that will add at the very least mine life. Then when you add in those extension, but extension of work, especially from goldie, that will add ounces we think in bunches of millions, given the continuity there. So I think yes, every time we've heard at least one of the operators talked about it, there's a comment that at some point you're going to stop just adding decade to mine life and think another shop conceptually, and put more through the mill that alone we'd be at a third full. So that's something we certainly look forward to. If I had to guess, I would say this year is a resource growth year. Next year that I just put into a revised mine plan. Either way, their success coming there, it's either coming in the form of material additions to mine life. More likely than not, it's coming in the form of additional ounces. And when you think back, was it a year-and-a-half now? Maybe not -- maybe a bit more. The story was uncertainty as to whether the partnership would build the underground. So then it was -- is there a gap year or more, between the open pit in the underground that's now gone. It's turned into a little bit of a dip. I think, if you fast forward a year, again, that dip will turn into, at least, flat production where the mine continues to produce at its current types of levels. So yes. Short answer is, I would like to [Indiscernible].

Okay. And then just lastly, if I can put Trusz, Sean to work. I was an only OG the conference call and a top minority all. Just wondering, Sean, what do you envision for production from Cariboo in San Antonio. Thanks.

Sure, Mike, I'll jump in. The profile right now is if BL2 On the Caribou project is in production, we expect 20,000 plus ounces this year. The QR mill is up and running. We have a bulk sample plans to go underground here in -- starting here in Q2. And then the transition, we're looking for the [Indiscernible] approval and early works permits to come out probably by the end of 2022 for the larger Cariboo project. And we would start to portal and hopefully get underground account mountain and have some trend -- transitional material going to the QR and continuing to optimize our [Indiscernible], but we'd be looking have the full concentrator built out as well by the 2024 and set the table for at least the production of 180,000 ounces a year. Coming out of that, and we increased that mill production from 4,000 and 47,050 tons a day for those. So we are setting the table for a larger project there, Mike and we continue to see that evolving and certainly the work that we did in 2021 has encouraged us was a 152,000 meters drilled in there. And this project continues to strengthen San Antonio. We are in production rate now, with the stockpile, we have 16,000 ounces, you get a 1,000,000 on stockpile. We want to recover in the short-term. And via the full permits for the [Indiscernible] open pit is underway and we hope to have that permit available to us by the end of Q4 of this year. And we have a 15,000 ton-a-day plant that we purchased earlier that's on-site. So we'll be looking to ramp that up. $10 to $50 -- $10 to $25 million investments, depending on how aggressive we get in the early days. So two small-scale productions on-the-go there plus the [Indiscernible] asset. Hopefully we'll close that up in this quarter -- sorry -- in Q2. And they are in production as we speak. So we would have three small-scale producers by the end of 2022 transitioning to much larger production through 2023 and 2024. So I think we've set the table pretty good for that one, Mike.

Okay. Well, thanks for that. See both of guys in the lobby bar next week. Thanks. Take care.

Alright. [Indiscernible]

Thanks [Indiscernible]

Our next question comes from Puneet Singh from IA Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi, Puneet.

Hi. Good morning. Just that Renard since going to contribute again. I see last year, they sold about 1.8 million carats. Is that the run rate for production on an annual basis we should look forward to? And also, if I'm recalling correct, most of the production was coming from those higher-grade R2, R3 areas, and then it will go lower grade later. Is that still the plan there or what's the latest update now that asset is doing better?

Yeah. Look, I think I would say some variability is normal, but I think that run rate that you're looking at for 2021 is probably about right, at least for the next few years. They're down, I think it's around the 600-foot level. You're right as well that as they get lower there, the grade will drop a little bit. I don't have the numbers off the top of my head right now. But I think, for the next several years, we've got a mine plan that will be pretty steady thereafter. I believe we'll see -- they'll what the gold price looks -- sorry, the diamond price looks like and decide where to take the development from there. And there is also still some exploration upside there, Frank. So I think, for the third part of your question, yes, while we were relatively steady, the biggest change will frankly be the biggest variability and will be how we turn those carriers into GEOs, if you will. But we tried to be conservative. And then thereafter, our primary focus is turning stream back on, which is job one. And then with the cash they are building up right now they can start to look forward to the future. It's been obviously tough for them living hand-to-mouth for a little while for the last two years. So it will be nice for that team to have some more flexibility.

Okay. And do you think they'll do more larger scale experlation probably in the next couple of years, but it run for a little bit, get more cash, and then I think go from there.

Yeah. Look, I think the idea is walk before you run, but I can tell you that even with the diamond prices that they were benefiting from before, there has been -- there currently is some exploration work going on. So when you take when you zoom out a little bit, the payback top working cap facility last in the last year, they will probably pay back the rest of it this quarter and process. They've also been doing some not major, but some exploration work in particular into those lower zones to firm up those grades and hopefully tighten up some of those grades. So yes, they are doing a lot of good things and certainly the line is night and day from where it was when pre -Covid and diamond prices hit a low. We're averaging $70 a carrier hit some lows in the mid-60's, so what a difference a couple of years maybe.

Yeah. Definitely, it's glad to see it going to contribute again. Thanks, Sandeep. No problem.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Joshua Wolfson from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thank you very much. Good morning, Sandeep. Had a question on the guidance for 2022, the numbers at least relative to our forecast were a bit better. Part of that's Renard and the diamond pricing. And I was wondering what the remainder components would be? Manto presumably is a portion of that. I'm just wondering if you could maybe reference what contribution year-over-year charge you would it from [Indiscernible] given it is a ramp up here. And then if there are other key assets that would be helpful for us. Thank you.

[Indiscernible]. Good morning. Look, I think there's skew things going on in 2022 versus 2021. One just take a step back. Take a step lower before we talk higher, we've as I said earlier, we've taken into account the guidance from Agnico and you're meant on Malartic, it's actually a touch below, so based on their numbers, we'd expect about 3 -- 3,5000 less GEOs in 2022 versus 2021, just the normal variability and mine sequencing of that mine. So we got to get those ounces back first before we get to the growth. So it's a pretty impressive that we can have this guidance in front of you. So yeah, outlook Renard, even from May onwards, is it chunky contributor to that growth which is great to have back? Mantos you pointed out is -- we haven't given an exact -- it's not an exact science, so we haven't given an exact number, but we're kind of guided to halfway between that current run rate and the 16,000 ounces’ post-expansion of GEOs. So that will fall in between. There's also the additions of San Antonio -- sorry -- Santana and Ermitano, which are small but hopefully will work their way towards their thousand ounce per year steady-state contributions. The stockpile from San Antonio will contribute. The Eagle ramp up we think will conclude. So there's a number of things, many of which are on existing assets, but then some new assets that are starting to contribute, as well as some BL2 ounces in there. So that's generally the makeup of that difference and we feel pretty excited about it.

Okay. And maybe specifically on San Antonio. Is there any way you can kind of quantify what would be reflected within the guidance for that asset?

Well, I think that's up for worth it as [Indiscernible] I mean, I think the stockpile is kind of currently starting to percolate, talked about first Gold [Indiscernible] in Q1, early Q2. So we'll see what the ounces are there. It's not going to be a major contributor to us, but there will certainly be nice to get from that stockpile. Sean, I don't know if you -- obviously on, but what was the number? I think it was kind of --

That was 16 times ounces of gold out. Seeing 16,000 ounces recoverable in that stockpile and present. Hopefully, we'll be able to get that done. And then, if we can get some early contribution from [Indiscernible], the main debt, we've got an option to maybe put a little more on the pad, but that's where we are right now until we have a permit on [Indiscernible]

So it's a nice contributor. Just the stockpile alone. And obviously, the bigger milestone there is the permit that will survive the timing of that will drop when the [Indiscernible] ounces can start to contribute, which are obviously [Indiscernible].

And then on the Trixy acquisition or stream funding, there was a range that was provided, which I'm assuming. What's contingent dollar with the funding. Was it Odev would raise with Odev's funding having better visibility now, is there any third perspectives you have on what ours contribution would be towards that stream?

Well look, I won't I won't put Sean on the spot, I think from our perspective, we were quite happy with as much as we can get, but even on the lower bound, I think it's a great result for us that they were able to go out there and raise as much as they did. We thought the asset once people started to understand it, would resonate, it certainly happened a little bit quicker than I think any of us expected, so regardless of where it is, obviously you're right. Bill was more equity raise, so it wouldn't be a shock to be on the lower end of that. But regardless of where it is, we're very happy to have that contribution to us, which we think will contribute for a lot of years, once the picture gets filled in. And then obviously the bigger impact for us is on our equity ownership, in our dev which we're also quite pleased without. That will come into focus as the transaction gets closer to close. But you're thinking along the great lines I would suspect. Josh.

Okay. Thank you very much.

No problem.

Josh, for my side. I think any royalty on this property is going to be important.

Our next [Indiscernible]. Our next question comes from Don Vice from Paradigm Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi, Sandeep, and apologies if I have something that you covered. I joined a few minutes late. But with the cost consolidation of ODB end-year results, it currently, obviously, drags down your performance of the royalty business. Now that this financing has diluted, do you under 50% --will you be reviewing whether or not to unconsolidate ODB in your financials?

Hi. Don. No, we didn't in fact cover that, so new ground. Look, I think first things first, we are not diluted today. It's a lapping but disappointed out, we still own 75%. The transactions are closing, are leaning for third closing in late March, maybe drifting into April, but that order of magnitude. And there after will be down as you point out, the 45% level. So this is kind of what we had always said is we were going to let the market finance ODB obviously quite happy to get scream on the new acquisition that's our business model. But overall, let the market finance ODB and Sean has been very prolific at that in his history and certainly with with Odev. So with that, we are miles -- we will be miles ahead of where we were, if you will. At 75% it was tough to talk about that, although we talked about it internally. At 45%, I think we're a lot closer. I've been clear, I think, with everybody as well, that there's no bright line at 50 -- there's no bright line at 50, nor is there a bright line anywhere, so it's a combination of things. We talked about with our auditors and amongst ourselves. But a lot closer. So I think that's something that we'll continue to talk about internally, and when the right time is, we'll come back and tell you. But certainly we know that that's a hiccup. To say the least, it does provide a bit of noise. At the end of the day, we've done our best to segment that information, but I fully realized on that until we can we cut that Tether off of financials perspective, it's going to be finished. And certainly, you can expect that all of us on the OR and Odev side are conversant and motivated about it.

Okay. Excellent. But you have definitely being doing what you said you were going to do in terms of letting Odev finance itself, become a separate entity. And so, definitely good to see that, and heading in the right direction. Thanks.

Maybe a couple of pieces of color on that one, guys, at the financings that are underway close, plus the cash and the equity book. ODB should be sitting at about $320 million plus between the proceeds. The the financing cash on hand, and the equity book. And my goal, Don, will be determined ODB under our dividend bank company. Hopefully, we can turn that viewpoint around over the short term to near-term.

Yes, and no, the Equity could be a pretty important component for sure.

Thanks, Don.

Thanks.

Our next question comes from Trevor Turnbull from Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Yes. Hi. Sorry about that. I wanted to ask about one of the projects that's in the five-year guidance and one that isn't. I guess the first is Back Forty. I was -- I could probably dig into it, but I haven't had a chance to see what Gold Resource Corp. has been saying, but are they pretty confident that they will be up and running within that five-year window? Or maybe just give us some color, Sandeep, on why you're putting it in the five-year window; why you feel confident in that project?

Yeah. [Indiscernible] Trevor. And good morning. I'd say look, that is obviously one that is going to be a bit trickier, but we think we've built in enough conservatism there on the permitting and that's the major item there, Gold Resource and ourselves see the asset in the same way and we were very happy to see them come in as our new partner last year. They've got a very similar asset in Mexico that they're currently mining and they want this to be their growth assets for a longer life kind of views as what's our currently Mining without the market cap cash, access to capital to build it. That's why we felt comfortable that they are the right group to do this with, clearly the permit is the hurdle. There's a feasibility study that's on track for this year. And that will form the basis to go to that permitting exchange again. Obviously, there were set back in 2021, frankly, with the plan that we always disagreed with. But ultimately it has to be running the ground with a large The drill open pit and smaller underground. I think the view was that we're too far down the track, the change that's why pencils have erasers. So we're happy with the new track. Smaller open pit, less underground, no need for a wetland permit, which is where they got bogged down last time. And without in place, we think we've added enough buffer that they can certainly build it within that timeframe. So that'll be one that you can continue to test us on as the permit picture unfolds over the course of next year. But we felt that was especially given that it's earmarked, it's all like we didn't highlight it. And all of us, I think we'll be tracking that progress over the coming year, 18 months.

Yes, it certainly helps that they're side-stepping the wetland issue if they can. My other question was really with Falco and the Horne 5? That's potentially a very material project when it does come to fruition. And just wondered if you could maybe talk a little, or maybe Sean can talk a little bit about some of the next steps and what we're really watching for to feel better about putting a pin on the timeline on that.

Yes. No, Trevor, that's a good point that I think frankly, both Horne 5 and Pine Point, which are assets that we quite like in our group of family, in our group of companies. We put them out for the time being. With respect to Horne 5 specifically -- and this is what I said earlier, is -- including in our family of companies and others when there was permitting risks we tried to account for, and obviously, all these assets and development space have permitting timelines, we tried to factor those in. But what we didn't want to do is overlay permitting risks with financing risks. So that's kind of what I was getting to, whether it's back 40 or certainly whether it's Osisko Development [Indiscernible]. As those chunky assets move forward, we see the line of sight to how financing comes together. When there's companies that have a financing hurdle that's a multiple of their market caps. We didn't think it was reasonable for us to factor them in until there's more clarity. So we do have in that optionality category, companies that are guiding production within the next five years. And certainly we hope they will. But we wanted to wait until we had that visibility before putting out inaugural. All guidance sort of not guidance but outlook on that five-year basis. So that would that would fall into that category. Pine point would be another there's several, frankly. So as there's more clarity, we're happy -- we will be very happy to ship those ounces forward, but we just thought we should wait specifically with your question of progress on product, I think they're making meaningful progress. Certainly on one of their two issues, which is the governing relationship with them and growing core who have the smelter on surface. They're working through what they call Onlia, which is an operating license, predict the [Indiscernible] agreement. And there's maybe progress on that, but it's a pretty intensive document, so it's gone from term sheets to final documentation, taking a little bit longer, but that's one key hurdle. And I think everyone is driving towards the same goal there. So eventually, that will get cleared. And then they'll move forward to looking to crack to financing that. But frankly, nine million ounces of gold equivalent is important. In Quebec, it's important. It's even more so important. And you're right, it's a chunky contributor to us. Again, perhaps such a chunky contributor, whether them or casino, 25,000-ounce year contributors, assets that I believe deserve to be built, which is a question of when so when you have those types of things in your back pocket, meeting only one of them to work. And we have a list of them that's a pre -humble (ph) position to be in.

No, I can appreciate that. And I guess you should kind of touch on what I was getting now with horn and that is you're still felt goes out the table trying to kind of hammer out the final arrangements with Glencore. I know it's always hard to talk for other companies, but do you have a sense of -- is this something that Glencore seems focus on or do you feel like this processes at all back - burnered by them or how would you characterize their intentions at this point?

I think it is the former, this is important to the health and future of one it is a very important asset for them at the warns smelter, which is what leads to delays and long timelines, but it also I think leads to an ultimate positive results. And even in my limited interaction there, I would tell you that I do believe they are focused on it, and it's important to them. Same token is a very large organization and they have a lot of other things to do. Many in most of them take precedence. But I would say despite that, I've been very pleasantly surprised at the how much effort goes into this file. And I would assure you that it is important for them and for us.

Good. Yeah, it's better to get it right than to be rushed on it. I appreciate it. Thanks.

No problem ever pretty complicated piece of business and you're right, you want to do it, right the first time.

Great. Thank you.

We have no further questions in queue. I'd like to turn the call back over to the presenters for any closing remarks.

Well, thank you, operator. And thanks for taking an hour with us on again, was a pretty busy day, but a great kind of day for us. A great kind of phase for us. One where there's an important amount of growth in the company and some of the best development assets in the business. So whether it's a growth on our core existing mines, our growth from the development pipeline. I think the cash flow generation and the diversification that will come with it in this company is going to be pretty special over the course of decades. Every year in between. So thanks for your time and be well. Thank you, operator.

This concludes today's conference call and you may now disconnect.