Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Newcrest Mining full year financial results call. All participants are in a listen-only mode. There will be a presentation followed by a question and answer session. If you wish to ask a question, you will need to press the star key followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Tom Dixon, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator. Good morning, and welcome to Newcrest Mining's FY22 full year results conference call. This is Tom Dixon, Head of Investor Relations for Newcrest. This call is being recorded today, Friday, 19th of August, 2022. Just a reminder that Newcrest is a US dollar reporting entity, and all dollar references in the slides today are to US dollars. Any references to the prior period are to the 12 months ended 30th of June, 2021. With that, I'll now hand over to our Managing Director and CEO, Sandeep Biswas. Thanks, Tom, and good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining us today. With me on the call is Sherry Duhe, our chief financial officer. Today, we'll give you an overview of the full year results and operations, and then we'll be very happy to take questions. Before I begin, please note the company's important disclaimers. FY22 has been a very successful year, both from a strategic and operational perspective. Following our focus on maintenance and productivity improvements in the first half, we finished the year strongly, producing just under two million ounces of gold at an all-in sustaining cost of $1,043 per ounce. We've released a strong set of financial results today with a statutory and underlying profit of $872 million and operating cash flows of more than $1.6 billion. I'm very pleased to announce that the board has determined a fully franked final dividend of AUD 0.20 per share, bringing our total dividends for the year to AUD 0.275 per share. While this exceeds the payout targeted by our dividend policy, we're comfortable this reflects our commitment to disciplined capital management. Our balance sheet remains in excellent shape following completion of the Pretium Resources acquisition, and we have access to well over AUD 2 billion in liquidity, giving us ample flexibility to fund our growth portfolio. We continue to advance works across our portfolio with Cadia, Red Chris, Havieron, and Lihir all expected to reach key study milestones in FY23. As we've previously said, our substantial increasing exposure to copper positions us very well over the longer term. Copper is a critical metal of the future with a compelling outlook in a decarbonizing world. In March, we successfully completed the Pretium Resources transaction, generating immediate production and cash flows for the group. Our transformation program at Brucejack is progressing well, and we've made considerable progress with a range of new opportunities being pursued. On the safety front, I'm pleased to report that we are now nearly seven years free of fatalities. It's a tremendous credit to our people and testament to how far safety is embedded into our culture. We did, however, have a challenging year in relation to injury rates. While the injuries incurred were predominantly low severity in nature, no injury is acceptable, and we're working hard on prevention. We've made inroads into building a high-performing, inclusive and psychologically safe workplace culture this year. We're absolutely focused on preventing and eliminating sexual assault and sexual harassment from our workplace, and our Respect@Work program is aimed at ensuring everyone across our global workforce feels safe, respected, and valued. We made great progress against our four key and even stronger Newcrest aspirations in FY22. Works have been advancing for Cadia PC1, 2, Red Chris Block Cave, Havieron Stage One, and Lihir Phase 14A as these projects progress through the feasibility stage, and we look forward to providing updates over the coming months. Cadia achieved some important milestones during the year, including the successful replacement and upgrade of the SAG mill motor, the commissioning of the new moly plant and first shipment of moly concentrate, and regulatory approval to increase the permitted processing capacity to 35 million tons per annum. I'll also note that the activities to remediate instability in one of the ventilation rises at Cadia has now been completed and underground mining has returned to full capacity. Our team has done a fantastic job to continue surface operations while completing the necessary works to stabilize the rise, and we've seen no material impacts to our expected production this year as a result. At Lihir, we remain focused on realizing the full potential of this unique asset. We expect to release the findings of the Phase 14A feasibility study next quarter, and we continue to work on delivering a sustained improvement in operating performance. The benefits of Lihir's mining improvement program were evident in the June quarter with record quarterly material movement, and we expect higher mining rates to continue into FY23. Red Chris continues on its journey to be a long life, low cost mine. The Block Cave PFS released last October highlighted the quality of the Red Chris deposit, which is capable of producing a significant amount of gold and copper at very attractive cash margins. Drilling results at East Ridge have also been beyond expectation and continue to expand the mineralization outside of our initial mineral resource estimate. FY23 is expected to be an investment year for Red Chris, with the stripping program underway in the open pit as we finalize the feasibility study and turn our minds to the Block Cave. Our team is also progressing plans to extend the life of the Telfer operation. The West Dome cutback is well underway, and we're continuing to assess both open pit and underground extensional opportunities to further extend Telfer's life. We've announced today that we will not be exercising our option to acquire an additional 5% JV interest in the Havieron project. The 5% option price was determined by an independent valuer to be $60 million based on the process set out in the Havieron joint venture agreement. Newcrest earned its current 70% interest through expenditure of $65 million and the delivery of a pre-feasibility study. An additional 5% for $60 million does not meet our return hurdle requirements, and we're very comfortable with our 70% interest. The Havieron team continues to work through the feasibility study, including the schedule for first ore, and we expect to release this in the December quarter. The JV is moving forward with early works activities, including the exploration decline, which saw development rates accelerate towards the end of the financial year, with steady improvement expected to continue in FY23. We were very excited to add the Brucejack mine to our portfolio earlier this year. The transaction positions Newcrest as the leading gold miner in British Columbia's Golden Triangle, and we now have a global exposure to six Tier one ore bodies with a significant long life advantage compared to our peers. Following completion, our team has continued to make great progress on our three-phase transformation program. I was particularly proud to see the safety performance of Brucejack continue to strengthen with our new safety program now well underway to further improve the safety culture. Our team has worked extensively over the past few months to validate our synergy estimates. We're very pleased to increase these expected benefits today with a clear path to surpass our pre-acquisition goals. Our Edge program has also kicked off to pursue additional cash flow opportunities at Brucejack with an initial focus on stope turnaround time and more efficient mine operations. Together, these programs are expected to deliver savings of between CAD 35 million and CAD 50 million per year. We're also progressing the debottlenecking concept study to target an increase in mill throughput capacity at Brucejack. We expect this to be completed in the coming quarter with a permit application expected to follow in the March quarter. We've seen some exceptional drilling results at Brucejack in recent months, supporting the potential for a significant resource growth adjacent to and beyond the Valley of the Kings Deposit. The drilling results have also expanded the footprint of high-grade mineralization at Golden Marmot, a new discovery located outside of the Pretium mineral resource estimate. This remains open in all directions. Brucejack's a very exciting asset with so much potential, and we look forward to providing further updates as we uncover additional opportunities for growth. As I said, it's been a very busy year for Newcrest. Delivering profitable growth has been our strategy for several years now, and on this slide, you can see the significant progress made on our growth objectives through FY22, and we have a range of important milestones approaching in the near term. Let's move now to sustainability. We have a goal of zero net-carbon emissions by 2050, alongside many of our sector peers. Our dedicated team has been working hard to develop our group net zero emissions roadmap that underpins this goal. Newcrest is starting from a good place on the journey to net zero with our Red Chris and Brucejack assets being hydropowered. At Cadia, we have one power purchase agreement in place, with the Rye Park Wind Farm expected to provide around 40% of Cadia's power from 2024 onwards. We plan to increase renewable energy at Cadia through the use of further such PPAs. In the medium term, the emissions reduction program will focus on emerging technologies and site applications of renewable energy. In the long term, we're investigating advanced technologies and processing efficiencies to reduce carbon emissions further with a specific focus on Lihir. We are committed to playing a positive role in the global transition to a net zero future and look forward to providing further updates as the roadmap progresses. I'll now pass over to Sherry, who'll run through Newcrest financial performance for the year. Thanks, Sandeep, and good morning, everyone. I'm very pleased to present to you for the first time, and it's such an exciting stage for Newcrest. In FY22, we delivered an underlying profit of $872 million at a healthy all-in sustaining cost margin of $732 per ounce or 41%. Our solid performance was in line with our expectations following the planned replacement and upgrade of the Cadia SAG mill motor and lower production at Lihir. The result is notable in the face of a number of other external challenges across our business, including the ongoing impacts related to COVID-19, supply chain issues, and significant rainfall at Cadia. Despite the headwinds, we remain in excellent financial shape to progress our exciting growth agenda. In FY22, we invested almost $900 million across a range of major capital projects and exploration activities. We were particularly pleased to see our operating costs trending lower in the second half of the year, and Cadia achieved its lowest ever annual all-in sustaining cost of -$124 per ounce. Our balance sheet remains strong, with significant liquidity, which I'll touch on in the following slides. Newcrest continues to maintain its very strong balance sheet and long-dated debt maturity profile. Our balance sheet strength enables us to be resilient through market volatility and provides a foundation for growth. We retain considerable capacity to execute our pipeline of organic growth projects at Cadia, Red Chris, Havieron and Lihir, with access to $2.4 billion in liquidity. Our next corporate bond repayment is not due until 2030, and we have a low weighted average bond coupon rate of only 4.3%. We will continue to maintain a strong balance sheet through the cycle, and pleasingly, we are not reliant on high gold prices to fund our future growth. As you can see, we remain comfortably within all of our key financial policy targets. Our leverage ratio of 0.6x remains well below our target of being less than 2x EBITDA, and our gearing of 10.2% is well below our target of being less than 25%. We also continue to retain our investment grade credit rating, which gives us good access to all capital markets if and when needed. As Sandeep mentioned earlier, the board has determined a final fully franked dividend of AUD 0.20 per share. This brings our total dividends for the year to AUD 0.275 per share. While this exceeds the payout targeted by our dividend policy, we are comfortable this reflects our commitment to disciplined capital management. Even with the pipeline of very attractive growth opportunities ahead of us, we remain committed to paying dividends to our shareholders throughout the cycle. Newcrest continues to monitor the impact of the cost inflation globally. A few examples of these cost pressures include higher oil, natural gas, and electricity prices influenced by the Ukraine-Russia war and rising demand, higher wages driven by a tight labor market, additional costs across a range of consumables influenced by geopolitical instability, and rising equipment costs, largely driven by supply chain constraints. In FY23, we estimate inflationary pressures will increase our cost base by around 6%-8%, though the short-term outlook for cost forecast remains unpredictable. We also expect continued pressure on our capital costs given competition for labor from infrastructure projects and higher steel prices. Through Newcrest's Edge program, we aim to drive a culture of innovation, high performance, and continuous improvement. This has been instrumental in us identifying inflationary impacts across our business, managing exposures through various protection mechanisms, and ensuring appropriate mitigation strategies have been implemented. We have a number of protections already in place to reduce our exposure to this volatility. For example, we extended our long-term fixed price electricity contract at Cadia until the end of FY 24, and oil hedging contracts are in place at Lihir for the current financial year. We are also managing market volatility in steel, energy, and ammonia through pricing formula structures, meaning we are less exposed to certain price fluctuations. It's important to note that our FY23 cost guidance incorporates our expectations on inflationary measures, pressures, as well as our protections and actions to manage through this environment. We've identified an array of levers to address and mitigate the inflationary pressures we are seeing in the market for both our operating and capital costs. These levers range from more traditional approaches such as supplier shifting and contract negotiation through to detailed demand management and inventory management. Other levers, like the use of digital enablers to increase efficiencies, are also in place. We've highlighted some recent examples of successes in this slide, and I note that the market is forecasting some key costs, such as fuel, power, shipping, and steel, to reduce in FY24 and beyond. We remain seriously focused on minimizing the cost pressures right across our global portfolio of assets and projects. In that context, I'm pleased to present our guidance for FY23. As highlighted on this slide, Newcrest is expecting to produce well over two million ounces of gold, reflecting a full year of production from Brucejack and another solid year from our other operating sites. I should highlight that Fruta del Norte had a fantastic year, and this is expected to continue for the year to come. Pleasingly, copper production is expected to increase in FY23, which is largely driven by higher throughput at Cadia. We anticipate continuing our low-cost production in FY23, despite a slight increase in $ million all-in sustaining costs compared to last year, driven by inflation, the addition of Brucejack for 12 months, and additional mining and milling volumes at Cadia, Lihir, and Red Chris. We expect this to be offset by a weaker Australian and Canadian dollar in FY23, easing pressure on cost in U.S. dollars. I'll now pass it back to Sandeep. Thanks, Sherry. In conclusion, our strategy is on track, and we are investing in our future. We have an outstanding organic growth portfolio capable of producing more than two million ounces of gold for many years to come. Our long life production profile is expected to be delivered at a competitive all-in sustaining cost, which means strong profits and margins even at lower gold prices. We have a substantial and increasing exposure to copper, and we continue to maintain our long reserve life advantage compared to our peers. We remain relentlessly focused on safety, building an empowered and inclusive culture and developing our sustainability credentials across our business. Our priorities for FY 23 are very clear, and we're very well placed for a bright future. Thank you so much for listening. With that, Sherry and I are very happy to take any questions you might have. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Please limit your questions to two per person, and if you wish to ask further questions, please rejoin the queue. Your first question comes from Rahul Anand with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, Sandeep and team. Thanks for the opportunity. Perhaps if we start with Brucejack. You pointed out the potential expansion in terms of throughput rates to 1.6-1.8 million tons per annum. That's a bit of a pickup from the current rates around 1.35-1.4 that you did in FY21. I take it the constraints are likely to be on the mining side. Perhaps can you help us understand what the scope of works is going to be? What the CapEx would look like in terms of getting that extra throughput? And what's the strategy in terms of being able to achieve that? And then I'll come back with a second. Thanks. Yeah. No, thanks, Rahul. It's a good question. It is principally mining-focused in order to get up to that sort of 5,000 tons a day or so, 4,800, 5,000. And that's where majority of the work's going in. A lot of what I talked about or I alluded to on the phone in relation to the efficiency of our stopes and our mining efficiencies are all directed towards how do we get more predictive about what comes out and how do we actually make it more efficient to enable that, the tonnages. The second piece is there will have to be some debottlenecking on the surface operations. I mean, this is part of the study that we're doing. I mean, we don't expect that to be, major, but we expect to have to tweak certain things here and there. Of course, the other piece is the permitting. We hope to be in a position to have the study more or less completed to the point where we can submit a permit application, you know, in March or April next year, something like that. We would submit that permit and obviously, you know, if it makes sense, we'll continue with the PFS and FS's and what have you, in parallel. When we do get a permit, then we're ready to go. That's kind of the broad outline. Okay. It sounds more like a debottlenecking and efficiency type exercise rather than doing something like developing a lot and basically. Yeah, absolutely. We're not gonna build a new milling line or anything like that. It's debottlenecking with a lot around the mine, you know, around efficiencies and how do we get that mining rate up. Perfect. Okay. Second question. Look, you've mentioned it a few times in the release today around inflation. And you have flagged 68%, you know, inflationary impacts on operating costs. I just wanted to get a feel for perhaps if you can break that number down a bit in terms of geography. Like what are you seeing in Canada, Australia, Lihir? Then also in terms of your growth projects, in the current environment, you're obviously undertaking several feasibility studies. How are you trying to factor that in? And does that. Is there merit in considering delaying some of that CapEx in light of what's happening on the inflation side? Let me give you a few comments. It's a pretty big question there, Rahul. Sherry, I'm sure will chip in. In terms of geography, we haven't delineated it in the release, but we certainly have looked at it in terms of the studies that we've looked at in relation to where to expect inflation. It kinda depends where you are. For example, in Lihir, you will see more, although we're hedged for fuel, that is energy is obviously a key component, seaborne, and therefore that will attract inflation in that sense. Whereas, elsewhere in WA, you're gonna have a more of a labor shortage type issue, so you'll see more inflation there potentially. It kinda depends, and that's why we'd rather talk about it at a broad level. Canada and BC has its own issues. The CapEx is an important point. That's why we're spending a lot of time during these feasibility studies to make sure that our estimates of escalation and also inflation on some of the key input costs are relevant. I mean, there are some of these things that, you know, we expect will start actually easing in FY24, FY25, but, you know, that's on current projections. We're just taking a very holistic look and doing a lot of statistical analysis and what have you, to make sure that the estimates that we put forward are robust and we can deliver on them. Sherry, do you wanna- Yeah. Yeah, just a couple of comments, and thanks for that, Rahul. I mentioned it briefly in my speaker notes as well, that we really go through and look methodically across a number of different cost categories. We've kind of identified what we'd say are about ten different macroeconomic indicators, and then we go in and look at what our contract mechanisms are in place and what else we can do. There's really three broad categories that we go after to help offset that, whether it be internal or external spend. The first are just traditional commercial levers. I mentioned a couple of them in the speech, but, you know, consolidation of contracts, volume-based discounts, rate standards. Standardization, low cost country sourcing and all of the typical things that you would do. But equally, if not more important for us are the other two categories, which is around demand and specification levers, and then also around using innovation and technology to help in those. We've had a number of successes with those already in mitigating some of these impacts in 2022, and we'll continue to pursue that vigorously in 2023. Maybe the only other comment I'd make is just to add on, you know, in terms of our capital projects, we have a very disciplined approach to screening those projects, and we'll continue to apply those hurdle rates that we're looking for to make sure they have competitive returns even in this inflationary cost environment. We're very confident we've got the tools in place to do that. Again, going back to the levers that we have across our categories of spend. Okay, perfect. Sherry just, would you be able to share those hurdle rates or is that something that you don't wanna discuss on the call? I'm looking over at the team. I mean. It kinda depends, well, what projects we're talking about. Greenfield projects, and this I have said in the past, is we typically look for 15% plus. Or if we're doing a two-stage project, we look for pathways through to 15% plus after you do one or two stages. On brownfield projects, typically they're lower. We look for, you know, double-digit returns. Now that's how it's been in the past. Now we've gotta, you know, in these unprecedented times, we've gotta have a look at all of that as we do our projects. But our projects are pretty good, right? And you've seen some of the preliminary numbers out of the PFS on, you know, PC12 and Phase 14A and what have you. You know, I'd wait and see. They're sort of in the range of the rates we looked at based on whether it's brownfield or greenfield. Perfect. That's very helpful, team. Thank you very much. I'll pass it on. Thank you. Your next question comes from David Radclyffe with Global Mining Research. Please go ahead. Oh, hi. Good morning, Sandeep and team. I've just got a couple of follow-up questions actually on Brucejack. At the time of acquisition, you had a lot of confidence in your geological model of the deposit. Yet, looking at the resource reserve, you're still obviously working on your own estimate. Just wondering there, do you still feel that you've got confidence in your model and it's holding up to expectations? There's been a lot of drilling done since the last estimate, so I was just wondering, firstly, if you could provide a bit more color there. Well, the first one is very similar to what happened at Red Chris. We can't quote any numbers of our own unless they're JORC estimates, right? So we're, you know, we do that now at Red Chris because it's a JORC estimate. Now, once we have a JORC estimate for Brucejack, then we'll start talking about our estimates, right? As opposed to what Pretium has said. That's just the way it is. In terms of the ore body itself, well, you know, you've seen the drill results. We're updating our model on the predictability in the mine itself, and that's part of the secret of how to unlock the higher tonnages, is having to be less selective because you're more able to predict what's going to be in each stope. That can, you know, release some of the equipment that we've got by trying to be more selective into just smoothing out that flow. We've got a summer drilling program underway and the results will be published in due course, but you've seen some of the results so far. I can tell you for a fact that I for one and then the board are very happy with that acquisition at this point in time. Brilliant. That's great to hear. Maybe just following up on the debottlenecking concept, the deposit, I guess, got a history as the grades come down, throughput's kind of gone up. When you sort of think about this concept, do you think of it operating at a similar sort of grade to what we're seeing now? Or do you think about lowering the cutoff and then maybe putting through a lower sort of grade, bulking it out? Really, I'm just interested here, given your comments about, you know, trialing ore sorting. Yeah. Look, I mean, you know, you know me, I'm gonna do what makes us the most money safely, right? All options are open. I think that, if we can, for example, if the ore sorting you mentioned, if that works out, you can have your cake and eat it too. What you can do is you can not only up the tonnage, you can up the grade as well, which is, you know, that's like nirvana and anywhere in between. I think with the installed capital we have, if you sweat it harder, such as what you would be doing with a small debottlenecking and increasing efficiencies, you're always gonna make more money. It's just a question of how much. I think so that's as we go into the concept study and then, you know, all these options remain in there. We've got test work on, we've done some preliminary work in BC, and we've got test work. We're sending samples over to Sydney to, you know, we've got a rig set up there with some suppliers of ours to test the ore. You know, all that is progressing, as I said last time, but it is work in progress. Okay, brilliant. That's my two. I'll pass it on. Thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Matthew Green with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Hi. Yeah. Good morning, Sandeep, Sherry. If I could just start on the EMD. Thanks for putting the oil hedges in the presentation. I was just hoping to get a bit more color on the actual profile there. So you say you've got 80% for the financial year. But it ranges between 50%-90% of your consumption. If I recall your last briefing book, you had calendar year 2022 as 90% of your consumption hedged. Do I interpret this as the December half, you've got 90% hedged and the second half of the financial year, it's around 50%? No, Matt, it was just a slight nuance in terms of how we applied the hedging policy, just given the volatility in oil prices. We have a mandate that allows us to go in and look at what the forward curve is doing versus what our budget premises were, and then just decide in a particular quarter, because we do it on a rolling basis, whether or not we wanna go 50 or all the way up to 90. What we have seen in the last few months here is that actually, on average, we're closer to that 90% across the quarters. Again, we do it on a rolling basis. Every three months, we go out and grab another three months going forward. Okay. Got it. Thanks, Sherry Duhe. Just to be clear then, if you're hedging 90% over the near term, does that mean you have to lower the amount hedged, I presume, toward the back end of the financial year? No. If I understood the question correct, we've got the mandate to go all the way up to 90%. We can go as low as 50%, but we can always go catch it up in a future month or future period if we see the curves doing what we think makes the most sense from an economic perspective. Okay. That's great. Thanks. Just my second question, just on phase two at Brucejack, on the debottlenecking. Sandeep, you just touched on the underground there. If I focus on the plant, it sounds like there's minimal spend there to get the mill up to the 4.5-5,000 ton level. This is just a case of optimizing grind sizes and reagent consumption. Is that a fair observation? There will have to be some upgrading of equipment. As you know, in debottlenecking, you know, for example, the mill, I think, is gonna be fine at whatever ton, but that doesn't mean all the bits that lead to the mill and away from it. This is the whole part of the debottlenecking study. I guess what I'm flagging is it's not like kinda major, you know, a second line or anything like that. There will be some CapEx involved. Yeah, there may be some opportunity as well to upgrade some of the efficiencies as we do our modeling. We've got a lot of great innovation in processing from our experience elsewhere in Newcrest. We wanna make sure that we take a holistic look at the next step at Brucejack, because we can. You know, we've got the IP and the knowledge. Okay. Appreciate the color. Thanks very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kate McCutcheon with Citi. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning, Sandeep. That's good news that mining and PC23 development has recommenced at Cadia. Are you able to just talk through the team's comfort in the fix to the geotechnical event in terms of stability for that rise for the life of the mine? Maybe just clarify the nature of the event. Are you gonna be able to rebuild those stockpiles that you've been feeding recently? Thanks. Yeah. Look, we're having a very close look, as you can imagine, as to the circumstances that led to what we faced. Our priority, as you know, is always safety, and that's why we moved, you know, literally, everything to make sure that priority one, everyone's secure, make sure we contain the risk, which is what we've done now. Now we'll turn our mind to the root cause. We're doing investigation. Then as part of that, we'll also assess whether we look at reopening that rise, or not or doing something else somewhere else. There's a lot of flexibility at Cadia. We'll do a full ventilation review, as well, to look at other options. This is not on the critical path for anything. You know, the expansion works will continue, PC23, and we'll, you know, the PC12 study will come out later this year and what have you. Really, we just wanna make sure we take stock of the current situation before we say what we're gonna do as next steps. Okay. Right. You're still evaluating? Yeah. Investigating. That's right. The mine's up and running. This, the vent rise is not on the critical path for any development. We've got the time to go through it in a considered way. As I said, the priority's been all about the people. In terms of the stockpiles, yes, we have chewed up some of the stockpiles. The stockpiles happen to be higher grade than the run of mine because they were made some time back, so that was very helpful, as you can imagine. Will we build them up again? We'll just have to see, as we increase our mining rates and what the match between that and processing is, we'll see over time, but that's not the focus right now. Okay, great. Second question, just on Lihir. Ounces for this year were a bit lower than I was expecting. Look, June quarter, you had great total material numbers out of the mine. What are the things that need to happen at this asset to get to that 900 run rate? When do you think we can get there? Has the timing of that 14A study pushed back a little bit? Well, the study is yet to be complete, but you know, it's on track, is what I'll say at this point. The three things that have to happen is, one, we've got to deliver the mining rates to make sure we have the phase positions and the stripping, et cetera, to get to the grades that we want as predicted, right? That's step one. As you pointed out, we've made a good start in Q4, and we continue to increase mining rates. That's on track. The phase 14, and we'll release the project, but that's gotta come in on time. The other piece is the one around reliability and availability in the fixed plant. Because of the mining rates and the stockpiles that we've got, the more we can do to improve the availability and utilization in the mill, then you'll be able to just treat more tons through it. They are the kind of three key drivers that we're absolutely focused on delivering on. We've got our asset management program focusing on the plant. We've got the mine improvement, which is what you see happening. Then we've got the Phase 14A project in the FS to be released later this year. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan with Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Hi, Sandeep and team. Question is on Havieron. I note you didn't exercise the option you had to get an extra 5%. Can you just talk through why a little bit broader? Isn't the value of this 5% only going to grow? You know, what are some of the key assumptions in the option process you were clearly uncomfortable with paying for? I know that you do talk about your return hurdles, which you know, I imagine that this you know, everything you've talked about in the past, I would have thought this would have made it. Thank you. Yeah. As you know, well, as I said, the first 70% cost us $65 million, which is an excellent investment. If you look at our, you know, Sherry alluded to, we've got a very rigorous capital allocation program. We've got a lot of projects to allocate capital to. Obviously we've also got our shareholders to think about as well. In that context, it didn't make the returns compared to putting that $60 million somewhere else. We didn't need to do it, and we didn't think it would deliver the sort of returns and the sort of thinking our shareholders expect from an owner's mindset in this company. Thank you. Just returning to Lihir. Material movements have been, you know, below plan for a while, but you had a huge step up in that June quarter. You know, I just wanna hear more about your confidence about material movements through the year and then, you know, delivering that, you know, can we get to that 70-million-ton material movement and beyond, which is needed to get to that plan? You know, do you have the equipment, the people, et cetera? Well, one quarter doesn't make a summer or whatever the quote is or to swallow or something. I agree. However, we have been planning to improve rates for a while. COVID did slow our progress considerably, particularly in the mine, which I flagged before. I mean, you know, it was just getting people on machines and getting them to site and getting them healthy was the priority. Now that we're coming out of that, we're starting to see the plans that we've had in place and the team's doing a great job to start implementing those plans. Now we're starting to see the results of that, and we expect that to continue right through FY23 up to the sort of rates that we need. The important thing is to keep it that way. A lot of time is going into operator training, into making things easier for them to do their jobs, straightening out roads and what have you, so there's minimal delays and, you know, just the grassroots bread-and-butter stuff that are important now, but weren't maybe so important at lower rates. It's, you know, there's no magic bullet here. It's sort of, you know, in the weeds, fundamental operating stuff. Okay. Thank you for your perspectives. Thank you. Your next question comes from Pauline [audio distortion] with [audio distortion]. Please go ahead. Pauline, your line is now live. Please go ahead. Would that be Levi Spry? Yes, Levi, your line is now live. Ah. Please go ahead. Awesome. Thank you. Wondered why I was at the bottom of the queue. Levi is Levi. Thanks, Sandeep. Dan's question on Havieron, can you put that in context around Telfer? What does production in FY24 look like at Telfer? When do you need to make some of these decisions on the pit and the underground? How do we think about that as a production hub as opposed to the Havieron mine plan, which looks like it's pretty well laid out? The way, as you know, the Havieron study will come out in the course of the year, of course. In terms of Telfer, the next decision, stage five is in the middle of the strip, which we approved. The next step for us to determine further production beyond phase five is we need to make a decision on phase eight. That decision, you know, to do it or not do it, is gonna probably come up in the next six months or so. Next six months. Okay, great. Yeah. Thank you. Just back to Cadia. Obviously, it's the bulk of our valuations. Kate's question on the shaft. Categorically no impact on development of PC two and three. You're processing even higher. Did you say the grades from the stockpiles are higher than mine feed? Yeah, yeah. So- They were. I mean, we've obviously gone back to run-of-mine feed because the mine's at full production again. But to be clear, there is a delay on PC two and three because we stopped work for two or three weeks, but you know, within the scheme of things, we'll obviously try and peg that back. Okay. The FY23 guide. We stopped all underground activity to make sure there's absolutely no risk to personnel, and we stopped that for three weeks. We stopped everything, just to be clear. Other than the mill, obviously, everything underground. Three weeks underground and then three weeks of stockpiles through the mill. Okay. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. A reminder to please limit your questions to two per person. Your next question comes from Anita Soni with CIBC. Please go ahead. Hi. I think I dialed in under my associates. It's Anita Soni from CIBC. Two questions for you, Sandeep and Sherry. The first one, I think, is with respect to the capital numbers at Havieron and Red Chris. I think when we look at the technical reports that were released in the last six or nine months, there was a higher CapEx spend for Havieron. It was around $140 million on 70% basis. Similarly at Red Chris, it probably should have been closer to $300 million, and you guys are materially lower. Is there a reason that you are, I guess, taking it a little bit easier? Is that part of your capital reduction efforts and sort of trying to mitigate the inflationary pressures that you have? No. I think on Havieron, if you're saying that we're spending at a lower rate than what we said. Yeah That would be primarily due to the delay in the decline. As I flagged in the past, we encountered some really tough conditions in the initial phase as we worked our way through the Permian. That's easing now, and we're starting to see development rates come up. But if it slows that down, obviously it slows your overall CapEx around, you know, all the other bits and pieces that make up the CapEx estimate other than, you know, the jumbos and what have you that we're doing the decline with. So that's Havieron. And what was the question on Red Chris? Red Chris, the technical report showing closer to, like, I mean, the PFS had around $283 million for this year. I think if you look at the technical reports, even closer to, like, $500 million on a 100% basis, so US dollars. I'm just wondering why the lower rate of spend? Yeah. No, no reason other than just to probably do readjustment of the timing and the profile of the spend. Yeah, exactly. We don't have that report sitting in front of us, but it would just be pacing because the scope of the activity has not changed materially. Yeah versus what you would have seen in that report. I mean, the key thing which we're very happy about is the critical path, which is the decline advance is proceeding. It in fact is slightly ahead of schedule. That's the bellwether for us, the critical path. Okay. My second question, I'm curious about this move up to 4,000-5,000 tons per day at Pretium, sorry, at the Brucejack asset. A couple of things that I would wonder about is right now it's all decline. Would you need a shaft there? I mean, it seemed like, as I recall, having been there a couple of times myself, it's pretty narrow, winding, twisty. Ventilation's an issue. And then once you get it up to surface, you've got your shipping out concentrate over a glacier. Have you talked to the BC government yet about whether or not that amount of shipping would be allowed? Well, that'll be all part of the permit process. But the thing we have to remember is, you know, Brucejack's a mine that mines under two million tons. It's not like at Cadia, where we mine 35 million tons. I mean. Obviously we'll do ventilation studies, particularly as we expand the mine and the footprint further with these further extensional things. You know, if we put a vent shaft in, we'll put a vent shaft in. It's not. I mean, this is at a very different scale to what we're used to. It's relatively straightforward once we know what we need to do. In terms of the government, absolutely. We've got to do our homework, and we've got to submit a permit that gives them the confidence, as we should do, that we're gonna manage everything well. We've considered all the whether it's glacier traffic or con shipping or what have you. We have no concerns with any of that. Yeah. I guess my comment on the mine as it exists now, I know it just seems like it's comparing it, I think, to the Cadia. It's just such a different mine from what Cadia is right now. It seems like it's gonna be a bit of work to get there. Maybe not capital, but time-wise. I'll leave it there. Yeah. It is. That's why we want to submit the permit earlier rather than later, but we've got to do the work to get there. Brucejack is very similar to Gosowong, where we mined there for, like, 25 years or something like that. You know, narrow vein, underground mine. You know, one of the things about Newcrest is we've kind of mined almost any type of ore body you can think of. That expertise resides within the company and obviously the significant experience we've picked up from the team at Brucejack and Pretium. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Tanya Jakusconek with Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Great. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for taking my two questions. First one is on costs. Just need some clarification. I see that you're using $95 a barrel in your guidance. I'm just trying to understand for a $10 a barrel move, is $3-$4 an ounce on your all-in sustaining? Am I in the ballpark for sensitivity? Well, give us a couple of minutes to do the calcs, and we'll let you know that, Tanya. Do you wanna get your next question, and we'll come back to that? Yeah. Still on costs and just keen that you have 4% of your cost structure is labor. I just wanna know what percentage of that is actually contractors versus just employees. Just trying to figure out why you're at 6%-8% inflation and most others are seeing 10%-12%. Just trying to understand the contractor component. Well, yeah. Cool. Contractors, well, now that we're in the middle of project, what sort of contractors? Well, we've got project contractors, we've got mine contractors. I mean, it's. I think the simple way to say is we've kinda looked at it from all angles, whether it's employees and whatever wage escalation we expect, the contract rates that we're seeing. Some are fixed price contracts, and you've got to chase what the labor component is. Some are cost plus. We've done the analysis, and that's where our estimate has come up. We've taken external advice as well as to what they're seeing, people with a broader kind of exposure to data and this is what we've come up with. Okay. All right. Just still on these costs, just on your capital- Tanya, can I just maybe add just one comment into that? I think part of it too, when you look at what other people are seeing, you've got a lot of calendar reporters that are picking up a different period when they look at their cost inflation across, you know, 2022, where we're looking at stuff that already came in, you know, in the course of 2021 into the first part of 2022. When you then compare that to what we're gonna see in 2023, where it starts to slow down already in some of those categories. Okay. You're putting in a slowdown as you go into next year. Okay, got it. And just on and appreciate, you know, we're seeing huge capital cost increases, of your big capital spend, which, you know, you do have at Havieron, Red Chris, Lihir. Which one would be more sensitive, do you think, to capital inflation because of where they're located and what has to be done? Each one is different, as I know. They're two very different scale projects too, right? Yeah. Sure. I think it's very difficult to say, Tanya. We're just gonna have to wait for the FS studies. I can think of ups and downs all over the place. In one case, you've got a mine like at Havieron, where your expenses is as you go once you set it up. Whereas at Block Cave is you put all your CapEx in up front and then you move to a more an operating model. It's a much bigger scale project. On just materiality, the same percentage of both mines, there's more exposure in whole dollars at Red Chris 'cause it's a bigger project. That's probably all I can say for now. Okay. I'll just go on to my last question, which is just on guidance. Just looking at it, from a quarterly perspective, would be very helpful if we can have some quarterly guidance. Looks like Cadia for fiscal Q1 will be weaker. Maybe just remind us on the maintenance and any weakness that you're expecting per mine in various quarters. That would be very helpful. Well, we've got, I mean, Lihir has its usual maintenance cycle, where we see shutdowns in sort of the September-October period and then again in March-April. Cadia's on a fixed regimen, of, you know, which has been doing it for years. I think the mill realigns every 12 or 14 weeks, something like that. Nothing's changed at Cadia. Okay. We maybe expect a weaker Q1 because you were down a bit, you know, in this period. If you're talking about the vent rise. Yes. That's not expected to impact our production. All right. When you're looking at it's just maybe some fluctuations on Lihir being weaker in those periods of maintenance, but everything else looks otherwise relatively stable? Typically, obviously, because we have poor planned shutdowns, it'll be weaker at those periods than others. That's kinda what happens every year. Okay. I'll take it as that. Okay, great. Thank you. Tanya, can I go back to your question on the sensitivities? Yeah. We've been looking at what we've published, and I don't think we're gonna be able to give you that level of granularity that you're looking for in terms of, you know, dollars per unit consumed. I think you have to be careful because you think about the hedge strategies that we have in place that currently are applied to Lihir will cause fluctuations even from that assumed price that we put in, just given the volatility in the energy markets. Sorry, I can't help you further with that specific number. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Alistair Harvey with J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead. Yeah, morning, Sandeep, Sherry, and Tom. Just one from me. Wanted to get an update on Wafi-Golpu, how the mining license negotiations are going there after the recent elections and, you know, how you're seeing that unfold, assuming it will be a little easier with the continuation of the existing government. Just a general update there would be very helpful. Yeah, the update there. If we go back to prior to the election, maybe around the March-April period, there was a flurry of activity and discussions between ourselves and. When I say ourselves, it's Newcrest and Harmony and the state negotiating team and various ministers, et cetera. As you know, that obviously comes to a standstill during the election period. Now that the Prime Minister's been reelected and, you know, he's yet to select his cabinet and et cetera, et cetera, there is no reengagement on Wafi at the moment. We're hopeful that once, you know, once the Prime Minister sets his team out and, you know, we'd like to recommence discussions as soon as they're ready, we're ready. It's a great project and I you know I do still wanna get that going. I mean, it's only become more valuable with you know with the copper and the gold and where the world's headed in those commodities. It's time you know I think to get it going for the benefit of you know obviously the PNG people the country the communities and the developers. Yeah. Thanks, Sandeep. Maybe just a quick follow-up on your comment there about copper. I guess you've also got Namosi in the portfolio. Does anything, I guess, given recent transactions, make you think differently about what to do with that asset in the portfolio in the short term? In the short term, I mean, we're slowly thinking of, you know, dusting off the file on that. At the moment, we've got a lot on. I think the first thing, and I think I said this last time, is we'll be relooking at the whole concept of that, given where copper prices are headed. It's not gonna happen imminently. I think because of its and it's basically a copper mine with a little bit of gold, nothing of that size, you know, in the location at sea level, in our neck of the woods can be ignored forever. Right now it's not a priority. Yeah. No worries. Thanks, Sandeep. Thank you. Your next question is a follow-up from Mohamed Sidibe with CIBC. Please go ahead. Hi. It's Anita again. I was curious. I didn't see the briefing book filed. Should we expect one this quarter or is it just delayed or you're not doing it this time around? It's a good question, Anita. We had a look through that briefing book, and we think a lot of that stuff didn't make sense to update again this time around. We've taken a number of the key slides that we thought you'd be very interested in and put those into the appendix of the presentation. You shouldn't expect an additional document at this time. All right. In terms of not updating it, meaning maybe not applicable or just we should just use the prior briefing book as the go forward for the next 2-3 years? I wouldn't say 2-3 years. I would say that stuff that's in the briefing book that's factual, you can continue to refer to. That's still sitting on our website. Stuff that's related to long-term studies, et cetera, the next updates that you should see on those will be when we get to the next stage gates that we've talked about over the next year. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Biswas for closing remarks. Well, thank you everyone for joining the call, and thanks so much for the questions. Have a great day wherever you may be.