Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. This is the event operator. Welcome to Barrick's Results Presentation for the Fourth Quarter of 2024. Following today's presentation, a question-and-answer session will be conducted. If you have a question and are joining the event by telephone, please press star then one on your telephone keypad. You will hear a tone acknowledging your request. We will also be taking questions from the room. As a reminder, this event is being recorded, and a replay will be available on Barrick's website through the 12th, 2025. I would now like to turn you over to Mark Bristow, President and CEO of Barrick. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you very much, and very good morning and good afternoon to everyone here today, and for those that are on the call, thank you for joining us today. As you know, at Barrick, we are focused on delivering sustainable long-term value by owning the best gold and copper assets managed by the best people. Every quarter, we're getting closer to achieving our goal, with gold becoming more important as a safe haven in a geopolitically uncertain world and copper being as strategic as gold is precious. I plan to show you how we are adding value and building capacity in both metals without taking an excessive amount of debt on or issuing new shares. Needless to say, it's an exciting time to be a gold and copper miner, with more upside in the commodity price, in my opinion anyway. It's been a transformative year for Barrick, one where we have invested heavily in our people and our assets, and we feel that we've reached a pivotal point that will add impetus to our strong growth trajectory. Above all is our unwavering commitment to sustainability, enabling our vision not only to be the best gold and copper producer in the world, but also one that people will want to own. This is our customary cautionary notice regarding forward-looking statements, which you can read at your leisure on our website, so moving to our group highlights, it's great to see all the arrows once again pointing in the right direction. We saw EBITDA increase 30%, and EBITDA margins grow both quarter on quarter and for the year. Also, thanks to a strong performance in the last quarter, as we pointed out and discussed when we last met, we met our 2024 guidance. Adjusted net earnings per share grew 50% year on year to $1.26. The quarterly dividend was maintained at $0.10 per share, and we repurchased an additional $354 million of our own shares in quarter four, taking the total for the year to almost $500 million. We also continued our exceptional track record in reserve replacement for both gold and copper, adding substantial new reserves from Lumwana and Reko Diq. That's 12, in addition to the replacement, 12.7 million ounces of gold and 13 million tons of copper of reserves from those two projects, which, just to put it in perspective, is on a gold equivalent basis equal to 73 million ounces of gold. Quarter on quarter, gold production from our mines increased 15%, and with a 3% reduction in cost of sales and 5% decrease in total cash costs, driven by our focus on cost efficiencies. Nevada played a key role in this performance, with a significant throughput and production boost as it delivered on guidance. On the copper side, Lumwana posted a quarterly production record, and on a group attributable basis, we achieved production guidance for both copper and gold. Turning to the financial results, some of which I've already touched on, we achieved the highest net earnings in a decade. Operating cash flow for the quarter was up 18% to $1.4 billion, taking the total for the year to $4.5 billion, the highest we've achieved since 2020. This strong performance led to a 104% increase in full year free cash flow to $1.3 billion for 2024. Strong cash flow supported $500 million of share buybacks on top of $700 million in dividends, which kept net debt in line at just over $650 million. Safety and our journey to zero remain our top priority. Unfortunately, as we have already reported, we had three fatalities in 2024, which is unacceptable. We, however, ended the quarter with significant improvement on the lagging indicators when compared to the same period last year or the previous year. What was particularly encouraging was the increase in critical control verifications conducted at the sites, as well as the number of actions closed out after high potential incidents, both of which represented our focus on leading indicators too. This improved performance meant that we achieved our improvement goals for the group. Additionally, there was no Class One environmental incidents, and we again achieved an industry-leading water use efficiency rate of 85%. We continued to integrate our holistic mine closure strategy across the group and drive long-term value creation. Most notably, we exceeded our group concurrent rehabilitation target for the second consecutive year and put seven of our old tailings storage facilities into safe closure, and we are targeting a further five this year. As usual, we'll start our operational review with North America, which, to remind you, accounts for 47% of our total attributable gold production and is Barrick's value foundation. The new leadership team has settled in well, focusing on the key metrics we identified for improvement in Nevada, including efficiencies, agility, profitability, and growth. For this, we've identified several growth opportunities, including both brownfields and the new Fourmile project, which we'll discuss further later. Moving to the summary of the results, the numbers speak for themselves. As we anticipated, we saw an improvement in production and costs driven by a strong quarter four performance across the complex, and particularly from our three Tier One assets. This, along with the higher gold prices, supported a solid set of financial results for both the quarter and the year, and as mentioned, Fourmile is one of the most exciting new gold opportunities. The team has done excellent work to move that project to pre-feasibility study. We are allocating $78 million for the 2025 year to begin the pre-feasibility study work, which we expect will take about three years to complete. In terms of mineral resources, there has been a significant improvement in the 2024 economic assessment, as we highlighted at our November capital markets day. This project is essentially an extension of Goldrush, with much larger ore bodies and nearly double the grade, making it a highly promising opportunity, and we will continue to share updates on this project as we move forward with the pre-feasibility study throughout the year. In addition to Fourmile, we are continuing to expand our significant brownfields portfolio in Nevada. At Carlin, the Greater Leeville area holds substantial potential for further discovery and depletion replacement, while at Cortez, we have the Hanson extension within the Cortez Hills underground mine, which remains open in all directions. We're also advancing greenfields work with drilling at Swift and in the Carlin Basin near the Gold Quarry deposit, confirming large Carlin alteration systems undercover. And at Turquoise Ridge, we're upgrading the model and have recently defined several new near-mine targets to be tested in the coming months. Looking at North America as a whole, we're continuing our work in Canada, focusing on Southern Superior with drilling progressing at both the Norris and Patrice projects. We're also expanding our footprint and priority belts across Western United States for both gold and copper assets, which includes the ongoing consolidation of an exciting portfolio in Western Nevada. Moving now to Latin America and Asia-Pacific region, which accounts for 17% of our gold production and 21% of our copper production, and boasts two key growth stories. The Pueblo Viejo expansion is making good progress, and the bankable feasibility study at Reko Diq, which is now complete and received conditional approval from the board to proceed yesterday. It's also worth highlighting the performance at Veladero, which delivered its best production results in the last five years. Gold production at Pueblo Viejo remained relatively stable, with an improvement throughout the year in recovery rates reaching 80% by year-end as forecast. Pueblo Viejo is making good progress towards its goal of becoming a low-cost, long-life, plus 800,000-ounce gold producer. Ongoing work includes 35 days of planned downtime this quarter for throughput improvement projects, with additional shutdowns expected in quarter four to further improve recoveries. We're also advancing the El Naranjo tailings storage facility, an important infrastructure project to support the mine's life extension. Looking ahead, and as shown here, we are focusing a step-up improvement in throughput and recovery on the back of those plant improvements and upgrades I referred to in the previous slide. We expect to be in the mid 600,000 ounces for this year, with the target of exceeding 800,000 ounces next year. On this slide, you can see some updates as we move forward with our ongoing resettlement of affected households for the development of the tailings storage facility. This resettlement, which aligns to the international best practices and standards, will ensure that those affected by the project have the same, if not better, living conditions. We believe it will be better with clean running water and electricity supplied to each house at the host site. This will, along with the livelihood restoration plan and access to education facilities, allow the families being resettled to build a better future together. The first families will be relocated in the next few weeks. On the exploration front, we've refocused our entire portfolio across LATAM and Asia-Pacific, targeting a series of new Tier One level opportunities in the region. The most advanced projects are in Peru at Libelula, where we are drilling multiple targets, and Ccoropuro, which is a porphyry project that is currently progressing through permitting. Additionally, we are actively evaluating our first set of early-stage properties in Ecuador with six prospects currently under review, all of which are promising. Reko Diq, I must say, just gets more exciting day by day. With the feasibility study now completed, our focus has shifted to the early works, project startup, and wrapping up the funding. The project is structured in two phases, with the total estimated budget for phase one of approximately $5.6-$6 billion, as shown in the graph on the bottom right. This mine is to become one of the lowest-cost copper producers in the world, sitting well below $1 per pound after gold credits. Free cash flow is estimated at around $74 billion over 36 years, excluding taxes payable to the governments of Pakistan and Balochistan, and further details are outlined in the table on the left of this slide, and we expect to publish the full 43-101 report next week, I think, Simon. Our limited recourse project finance discussions with a potential lending group comprised of multilateral export credit and import finance agencies are well advanced, and we are targeting to sign this early in the third quarter. Subject to the financing, again, yesterday, our board has conditionally approved the go-ahead of the project, with first production targeted by the end of 2028. Just as a reminder, it's worth pointing out that the bankable feasibility study focuses only on four porphyry deposits, three of which are part of what we call the Western Porphyries, along with the Tanjeel deposit, as shown on the slide. It's important to note that the current bankable feasibility study is based solely on reserves associated with these four porphyries, but there's significant potential beyond that. In total, there are 14 identified porphyry bodies within the mining and exploration license owned by Reko Diq Mining Company. Our geologists, as we speak, are currently actively evaluating these other bodies, which will certainly influence future life of mine plans and reserve and resource estimates. There's a substantial upside, and while the feasibility study assumes 36-year mine life based on reserves, all indications suggest the mine could still be operating through the rest of the century. Moving to Africa and the Middle East, these regions contributed 38% of our attributable gold production and 79% of our copper in 2024. Like Lumwana, the Super Pit expansion at Lumwana is close to being fully permitted, and the feasibility study is now complete. We've appointed our engineering partners and finalized the environmental and social impact studies for which we now have received the permit. We are also on track with early works design and long lead item fabrication. This highlights the big advantage of emerging markets, where large expansions and new projects can be completed much more quickly than in the developed world, but at exactly the same standard. In addition to the work at Lumwana, last week, we signed a memorandum of understanding with the Zambian government's Industrial Development Corporation of Zambia, forming a strategic partnership to drive mining and exploration in Zambia. This collaboration aligns with Zambia's vision to increase annual copper production to 30 million tons in the coming decades. Starting with Loulo-Gounkoto, in spite of the challenges we are currently experiencing in Mali, production increased by 8% in the fourth quarter and exceeded guidance for the year. Gold sales were down significantly due to the restrictions placed on exports by the Malian government. As you know, in addition to export restrictions, we've faced the unjust incarceration of some of our team members, which is a difficult situation to navigate. We are actively engaged with the administration to secure their release and on a sustainable solution moving forward so that we can restart the mine. This situation has led us to file for exit arbitration to assert our rights, but at the same time, as usual, we remain engaged and are hoping to continue to make progress, albeit slowly. Our goal remains to reach a lasting solution that brings benefits to Mali while ensuring fairness and supporting the long-term viability of this world-class operation, this being crucial to the country's economy as well as all its other stakeholders. I thought it would be worth putting a few points into perspective, as at times, there has been a lot of misinformation about the benefits that Mali has received from the development of these assets. Since 2005, we have contributed more than $3.2 billion U.S. dollars to the Malian Treasury in the form of dividends, royalties, and taxes. More recently, in the past two years alone, we contributed $400 million in 2023 in cash to the Malian Treasury and $460 million in 2024 to that same Treasury. Had the mine not been forced into temporary suspension, we were on track to contribute more than $550 million in 2025 at current gold prices. Beyond the financial contributions, our focus has always been on long-term growth to sustain those benefits for Mali and its people. Since 2005, we have produced nearly 10.5 million ounces of gold and have added more than 15 million ounces to reserves, extending the mine's life to 2041. But more importantly, we have built and developed local talent. Today, Malians are operating across our global business, including in Nevada, and their expertise is a key reason why these assets continue to succeed. The talent extends beyond our workforce. We have helped develop Malian businesses that have pioneered growth in the mining sector, some of which have expanded beyond Mali as a country. From specialized mining contractors to fuel and consumable suppliers, the economic multiplier effect of mining is immense, creating opportunities to go far beyond the mine itself. Now, crossing over to the DRC, Kibali, the biggest gold mine in Africa and one of the most automated in the world, had a much improved quarter as we worked to address some operational challenges that plagued the mine for most of the 2024 calendar year. While it took longer than expected, those issues are now behind us. Kibali is a great mine, low cost, with a long life and significant opportunities within its mining lease. Production increased quarter on quarter, and sustaining costs were well controlled. We're confident that Kibali will show significant improvement across the board during 2025. The new solar plant and battery storage system are planned for commissioning at the end of quarter two of this year, and this will see an increase in the availability of renewable energy from 81% to 85%. In six months of the year, we'll generate electricity with zero carbon emissions. In Tanzania, North Mara was a standout performer across all metrics, serving as a great example of what can be achieved when the right management team is in place and operating to our standards. Production was up 20% quarter on quarter on the back of higher grades and higher throughput. At Bulyanhulu, we've seen significant improvements as we continue to increase the scale of the operation. North Mara's life of mine has been sustained beyond 10 years, and Bulyanhulu's life is well over 20 years. We'll dive into exploration details a little later. In Zambia, our Lumwana Copper Mine delivered a stellar performance. A record quarterly production brought the mine back into guidance and delivered a significant improvement in costs, ensuring a successful end to 2024. Many of the feasibility study assumptions for the superpit expansion have now been proven in the operation, the details of which are summarized on the next slide. The image on the left shows the superpit alongside a summary of the feasibility study results on the right. This is a standout project, and it is important to put it into perspective. When Barrick acquired the mine in 2011, it was unprofitable and resulted in a $5 billion write-down. In the past five years, a focus on cost discipline and exploration has added significantly to reserves, extending the life of mine by more than 20 years. Today, the mine is sustainably profitable and a pillar of our copper growth strategy. With the Superpit expansion feasibility study completed, we are now moving forward with the project development following approval from the board, as I explained earlier. The feasibility study clearly supports the value of this investment. Importantly, we can fund the Superpit expansion as well as our share of Reko Diq's development through our current and forecast cash flow facilities without needing to issue any new shares or take on additional debt. In fact, as I pointed out in the introduction, we are reducing our outstanding share count by buying back our own shares. I've already touched on the exploration opportunities in North and South America, and we continue to make significant progress in our Africa and the Middle East regions as well. The region remains a consistent leader, not only in meeting its guidance, but also in replacing the reserves we mine, both in gold and copper. We are actively investing in our future, focusing on material brownfields opportunities in the ARK target area just west of the KCD deposit in Kibali, while also pursuing new Tier One assets. Our greenfield footprints are expanding, especially in Tanzania, Senegal, and new frontiers in the Arabian and Nubian Shield. The recently signed MOU with Zambia also underscores our focus on expanding in the Central African Copper Belt. As I've always said, what truly sets Barrick apart from the rest of the industry is our ability to replace what we mine. Since 2019, we have replaced more than 180% of the company's gold reserves depleted. Notably, in 2024, we replaced the 4.6 million ounces of annual depletion at better grades before the addition of the Reko Diq reserve base. This replacement was driven by the usual strong performance in Africa and the Middle East, with additional significant growth in Pueblo Viejo as the result of pit pushbacks unlocked by the additional TSF capacity in the new Naranjo tailings facility. The conversion of copper-gold resources in Reko Diq adds nearly 13 million ounces of gold reserves at 0.28 grams a ton on a 50% attributable basis. Positioning Barrick to capitalize on the copper fundamentals, we looked to Reko Diq feasibility study, which added 7.3 million tons of copper at 0.48% to attributable copper reserves. The Lumwana Superpit Expansion feasibility study added 5.5 more million tons of copper reserves, resulting in a total project copper reserve of 8.3 million tons at 0.52%. This represents an addition of more than 20 million tons of copper reserves on a 100% basis since 2023, and these reserves were calculated at $3 a pound. These results from the respective feasibility studies pave the way to position Barrick on the global stage of major copper producers alongside our existing world-class gold portfolio. Our consistent focus on asset quality, which through our integrated mineral resource management and exploration strategy enables us to replace what we mine. Since the merger in 2019, we've added 111 million gold equivalent ounces to Barrick's reserve base, all at a cost of just $10 per equivalent ounce, not only replacing what we have mined but delivering substantial value. As highlighted in the slide, when you compare this to the cost of recent M&A transactions in the industry, the value we have created through doing this is abundantly clear. And ladies and gentlemen, it's on the back of this organic growth that we can forecast a 30% growth in gold equivalent ounces out to the end of the decade. As already highlighted, we are moving ahead with two key growth projects, which will see capital increase over the next three years before coming back to more normal levels. And as production increases, so too we expect costs to reduce, as shown in the slide. And as I shared with you last year at Investor Day in November, the value opportunity at Barrick only continues to increase. The slide here shows consensus net asset values with market multiples applied, including a modest one-times multiplier for copper assets. You can see that the value for Nevada and the copper business together exceeds Barrick's market capitalization. That means there's an implied negative value for the rest of Barrick's Tier One, Tier Two, and other strategic assets. I can also tell you that these consensus values are significantly lower than our own internal valuations, something we expect to shift when we publish the technical studies for Lumwana and Reko Diq later this month. No matter how you analyze the portfolio, the current share price does not come close to reflecting the fair value of our asset base and our prospects. You'll also see our view reflected in our buyback activity this quarter, which you can expect to continue. So, to recap where Barrick is headed today, I outlined earlier that we are targeting 30% growth on a gold equivalent ounce basis towards the end of the decade, built on our current reserves. As I've shown you today, we will continue to replace and add to those reserves and resources for further supporting our growth. What's more, we have the balance sheet strength to fund our growth and continue to invest in our own future without relying on the market. By any measure, Barrick today presents a standout value opportunity. And with that, ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for listening, and we will be happy to take questions. Hi. Good morning, Mark. Yes, straight out the block. Yeah, right out of the block. First question, the reduction in CapEx. So you trimmed CapEx. I think in the November Investor Day it was around $4 billion or $3.9 billion or so. And I believe it was about $1.5 billion in the copper side and $2.4 billion on the gold side. And now it's $3.1-$3.6 billion. So some of that's Loulo, I assume, because there's no capital for Loulo. And what's the other? Where did the other trim come from? Hi, Anita, it's Graham. The vast majority relates to Loulo because obviously we've excluded the production from our guidance and we've excluded the capital as well. There were some other small changes in Nevada, but really it's all about Loulo. Okay. Secondly, what are the standby costs at Loulo and where is that running through in the financials? So right now we've taken out all the gold in the circuit that we can. And so we're in a very much a break-even place today. We are engaged. We expected that we will continue to make progress on our conversations. And I'll just put this slide up. This is just an indication that if we start up early in March, that's the sort of hatched bar is our attributable portion of production. And so it's at that point. And as we've disclosed in the MD&A, right now we're not guiding for Loulo. Let's get it done and sorted. We have reallocated a lot of our experienced operators to other operations to ensure that they are active and contributing to the company. And we've got quite a big staff on Care and Maintenance because there's a temporary Care and Maintenance process. It's not a full Care and Maintenance plan yet. We expect to be able to bring that mine up and back into production very quickly. Really, Anita, for us, you've seen me. I've been reluctant to get involved in a public negotiation with the Malian authorities. We prefer to keep that at the level of invested to principle, and we'll keep you posted as we go. Okay. That would mean that the next question was the outlook 2027 through to 2029 assumes that Loulo restarts, right? That's correct. Okay. And then my final. I think just the point here is when you look at Barrick, I mean, it would not be a good thing to lose Loulo, not for anyone's sake, and particularly not for Malians, but equally for us. We are long-standing partners in Mali. Every one of our operations are independently viable. And Barrick's balance sheet is very solid. And so with or without Loulo will not change our long-term plan, our five-year plan, as you see here. And it'll just be slightly smaller, but fundamentally we can easily support the projects and the capital commitments during that period. And I think that's a very important point to underscore. Okay. And then my final question is with respect to the PV relocation efforts. There's been a couple of press releases that you guys have put out in the last two months talking about issues with, I guess, a commission that claims to be representing families and is hampering the process. Could you tell me how many families are yet to be relocated and what the timeline for construction for that dam is again, and when do you need that capacity? So it's 2029, I believe, 2029 completion. We are right in the middle of consulting and so we finalized the reimbursements. There's a lot of negotiation around individual plots, particularly for those people who have like Ccoropuro plots, etc. Those are. It's quite important that the commission we refer to rarely represents themselves. It's a selfish group of people trying to hold the rest of the communities to ransom. We are engaged with that as we do. We follow the IFC relocation procedures, which are almost identical to the World Bank procedures. We are working with them and the government and the communities themselves. What happened is that the commission tried to motivate people to block our access to areas that we need to do test drilling on the foundation of the actual starter wall. And so we, with the help of the government, mobilized the security forces to let us give us access. These are public road accesses. And once we were through, I mean, we were really welcomed by the communities and we were able to continue the test work. And we're back in doing the test work and have been for a couple of weeks now. So it is a process. I mean, these things are you get people who will exploit the opportunity. There are people that want to get ahead. And as you know, we've done a lot of this. And we're very mindful of this as families and their lifestyles and their ownerships. And so what we found is once we start moving the people into the new homes that I showed you, then things get a momentum of their own. But we're still in that stage of what we call evaluation. So we sit at each household, we work through the house, all the assets. We assess the value of that and then agree on not only the house itself, but we've got different size homes that we've already built and are continuing to build, but also the other things that like plants and other infrastructure that are not necessarily duplicated in their new homes. And that's what we're busy with at the moment. So I don't actually, I couldn't tell you exactly the percentage yet. It's still quite a way to go, but we're in that process now. Thanks. Brian MacArthur, Raymond James. Mark, I just want to go back to Fourmile. You've talked about better grade, better mining conditions, but there's also discussion about the processing facilities. I'm kind of curious whether you comment yet. It talks about flexibility going to the roasters or the autoclaves. How much you see potentially going each way at the moment? I get it. There's a lot more work to be done. Second question, I'm just kind of curious why there's a three-year PFS that probably looks like a pretty detailed PFS, and it may have something to do with what we're discussing the first. And three, if you could just comment again about how the joint venture with Newmont works. Thanks very much. So the joint venture, I think we've explained this quite a few times. It provides for us to be able to put the – in fact, it doesn't give us the opportunity. It gives us the obligation to put this project into the joint venture on a predetermined valuation, but a full evaluation, a market evaluation, not a bankable feasibility study evaluation. And so on that basis, we are continuing towards that. So it's a thorough evaluation. Last year, we did the preliminary evaluation trying to get a feel of the size. And I've just stuck the slide up. And what you can see is it's the continuation of the system that defines Goldrush. The difference is you're moving towards that big pink intrusive. So the rock becomes more solidified, more brittle. And so the mineralized fluids are breaking it. And one, it's much more competent geotechnically. And two, the ore bodies are bigger. And they're higher grade because most of them are breccia style ore bodies. And so far, if you just look at the different numbers, it's six grams and nearly 12 grams. So if you take and we showed you this at Investor Day. if you just take the Goldrush valuation model and use everything, including the cost of mining and development and processing, and you just put the grade in, it's an exceptional value. And of course, the unit costs of mining will come down because these are much higher, bigger stopes. So we understand the potential value. If you take Fourmile and you stick it into Nevada today, you change the full valuation of Nevada immediately. So there's every bit of motivation for us to get this asset into the Nevada business model. At the same time, there's a requirement under the joint venture to complete a feasibility study, so the decision we've made is to continue the evaluation, so the next step is pre-feasibility study level. And with that will come that we've already done the preliminary work on geotech to get access from Bullion Hill, which then brings in a new access into not only Fourmile, but it'll enhance the entire logistical cost of moving ore, even in Goldrush. And so that's the next step, and then for me, it's about how do we deal with our partners in Nevada Gold Mines to ensure that we get this thing recognized on its value and also start benefiting from it because I've got no doubt that certainly the shareholders we talk to, our shareholders, many of which are also Newmont shareholders, can see the opportunity here. So I think it's beholden on us as managers to find a solution that will unlock this value sooner rather than later for all our stakeholders. And that's really where I'll stop in that conversation. Lawson Winder from Bank of America Securities. Mark, thanks for the presentation today. Nice to see you. I'd like to come back to Mali, if you wouldn't mind. And I mean, just note that in Q4, you guys paid out over $100 million and then $249 million in 2024, roughly, in order to continue to advance negotiations. So conceptually, is that a payment that you would continue to have to make? And then without revealing Barrick's position on this, I understand the sensitivity of the negotiation. But can you give us a sense of what the Malian government is hoping to achieve? So I'm not sure you got the numbers right. You said that again, that we paid out? There was another expense number. It was so for the full year, 2024, it was $249 million. The note in the MD&A said that that was largely consisted of payments to the Malian government to advance negotiations. I don't know what proportion of that was, but I mean, more than 50%, I guess. Yeah. So the payment that we made to the Malian government, which was made in the beginning of October at the time that we were in a position where we thought we had agreed a way forward, was $84 million. So that's the amount that we paid. And that was really a one-off payment because, as I point out, we were at a stage where we believed we had an agreement, albeit that subsequently that didn't transpire that way. So that's the only payment we've made. Okay. So So Lawson, let me just try and frame it a little bit. So there are a few of our ex-employees who are advising the government who, in our mind, have conflicts of interest in many different aspects. But the fundamentals are they claiming that the mining industry had not fulfilled its obligations and that had taken out more than what Mali had taken out. And as I pointed out earlier, we have not done that. And so our approach to this is if we're going to find a solution and there are accusations, we accept that. Let's get round the table because we can deal with that. And as you know, we are very open and very transparent about what we pay and what we share and what we take out. The reason that the weighting is towards the Mali government and has been for a while is because we, as investors, we are constantly investing in extending the life of mine, but ultimately it evens out over time. And so if you change the rules midway through the game, you really compromise lots of things in not only returns for us and our investors who have risked that investment, but also for Mali because you shorten the life very quickly because adding a whole lot of royalties jack up the costs. And it's on that basis that we've continued to engage with the Malians and said, and we strongly recommend and have recommended to them that we sit around with experts. They don't have to be even Barrick experts. We can get external third-party experts to review the facts. And then on that basis, we can find a way forward. And it's worth sharing with you that when I took over the leadership in Barrick, Tanzania was closed. People were in jail. There were lots of accusations and all sorts of fines, not dissimilar. Same with Pakistan. And soon after that, Papua New Guinea. And today we are the—I mean, Tanzania is our go-to place, and it's a great example of real partnerships. And we're the biggest contributor to the treasury by country mile in that country. And Pakistan, we've just talked about the partnership that we've now announced and we're moving towards development. And again, the benefits to us as investors and the provincial government and people of Balochistan as well as the federal government are enormous. And so there's a way to find it because if you get down to the numbers, that's what business is all about. And so that's our focus because otherwise what happens is if you just load up the costs and you know this better than anyone, you shorten the life. And then the optimization of that ore body, you leave a lot of grade in the ground that's never going to go back. No one's going to go back and mine. And ultimately, it's the people of Mali that lose. The investors will move on to another country, another project, and another opportunity. And we, as you know, have a long history in Mali. And whichever way you cut it, the net benefits to Mali have been in excess of the benefits that we've taken out of that country because we've continued to reinvest. It's on that basis that we're engaged. We are absolutely clear that if we get down to have an honest, open conversation with people that are giving sound advice and are not conflicted or motivated by other things than just getting what's good for Mali, we'll find a solution. That engagement is ongoing. Okay. Thank you very much for that color. And then if I could, there was news reported of a potential sale of your 50% interest in Zaldívar. I would assume that's not one of your strategic assets. When you look across the portfolio, are there other assets that you would suggest may not be strategic at this point today? So Zaldívar is a huge focus of ours at the moment because it's about getting the permitting in place and making sure that that mine can continue to operate. And so we haven't made any decision or engaged anything as far as getting rid of that asset. At the same time, to your point, it is not a core asset because we don't operate it. And that's one of our key focuses is that we're not passive investors. But our big focus at the moment and our work with Antofagasta is to get that. And I've myself spent a lot of time in Chile dealing with all the legacy issues, of which most of them are now behind us. And this extension of the mining license is important for us at Zaldívar. And at a point in time, I mean, it's a valuable asset. It's not an asset that would be difficult to bring to account. It's also an asset that sort of shares a common sidewall with Escondida. There's lots of options once we get there to consider it. Tongon, as you know, is in the process. We have been working with the government of Côte d'Ivoire and progressing that sale. There are other non-core assets within our portfolio that will continue to get our focus because, and particularly as we ramp up these two big projects, because it really does. The one thing you'll see when you look at the 43-101, and even when you do the math on the numbers we've shared with you, the cash flows out of these big copper mines, particularly with the gold credits, are enormous. They become our biggest generator of cash. And so it reminds me of that absolute clarity of we stick to Tier One assets. Some of the assets that we have in our portfolio might have a strategic nature, be it Hemlo in Canada. And we've been working really hard to build a real Tier One opportunity or Tier Two opportunity in Canada. We continue to do that every day. Veladero, we added an extra three years left. And again, that's been a very well-run operation through a very dynamic peso crisis in Argentina over the last six years. And it had a very good year last year. The team has managed that exceptionally well. And it's delivered enormous returns to its two shareholders. It also is integrated into the Lama and Pascua properties across the national border. So that's, again, a strategic challenge of how do you manage that if you wanted to really look at it differently or bring it to account in another way. At the same time, we have a strong partnership with the Chinese. And I think there's a way of sharing more of that going forward. So we haven't got to a point where we're clear about how we would manage that within our portfolio, but we're certainly thinking about it. Same goes with PNG. There's a bit more work to do to be able to get PNG properly packaged. It's at that point now, if we can continue to deliver on the progress that has been made since we ramped it up. It's a very big cash generator relative to the equity portion that we own because we sweep everything until we get our closure of money back and all that sort of stuff. And so we've recut the profile of Papua New Guinea, focused in on making sure that we look at getting back some of our investments as a priority without damaging the long-term viability of the asset. And one thing I can assure you is that the Papua New Guinean government is aligned with us on that strategy because they also could do with a bit of return from that mine. And again, in the fullness of time, is it a place we want to continue to be as we grow our other sort of world-class businesses in places where we know we can get the money out and we don't have to deal with some of the social issues that you have to deal with in Papua New Guinea? So that's where we are. And we're definitely thinking about it. We haven't made clear decisions on anything, but Tongon is definitely one that we're doing at this stage. And I'll just reinforce, the one thing when we started out in 2019, I mean, the Barrick, as it was then, was a challenging business to run. It had many scorpions. Every time you turned over a rock, there was a scorpion. Today, all our assets are extremely viable and have positive cash flows. This is the time, a good strategy. We said we would deliver on these two big projects. We've done it. PV is a big value creator in Barrick. Again, you've seen me. I don't hesitate to clean up the portfolio at the appropriate time. The best time is when you have higher commodity prices. Certainly, we'll continue to keep ourselves very focused and stick to our strategy of having Tier One assets. Are we exhausted here in the room? Thank you. Martin Pradier from Veritas. My question is, are you still paying salaries in Loulo to the employees or how is that working? Yes, we are. Okay. And what is the cost for the company of you're paying salaries and you have no production, basically? So as I said, at the moment, we haven't really distilled that because it's a temporary closure. And what we have done is taken out the gold out of the circuit. So we have produced gold. We've got to be able to fill that circuit when we restart again. And we've put everything on a sort of running maintenance, so proper temporary care and maintenance. And there's no big net cost at this stage if it was all to restart and get going. We can't continue with this for long, but certainly, we can go for a couple of weeks or a month and a bit while we try and get closure with the Malian government. At that point, we would have to make a different decision. And we haven't made that yet. Graham, do you want to add to that? No. I mean, the only thing I would say is if you look at Porgera as a proxy, if we do go to a care and maintenance environment, the sort of historical run rate there was about $10 million a month in holding costs. So that's a reference point if you're looking for something. Perfect. And one other question. The cost of Pueblo Viejo was 14% higher despite production falling only 5%. Everything compared to the previous quarter. You're talking about all-in sustaining costs? I think it was the cost, the reported cost, I think, and I wonder why. What we had, the big driver in the cost in PV in quarter four was that as per the mine plan, we had lower grade. So that impacts the unit costs. Our focus was we were focused on throughput and recovery during that period. We're going to go down now to fix the thickener and we'll upgrade a number of de-sliming facilities, thickeners. We need that to now lift again the throughput rate and to be able to deal with the improved recovery. We showed in the slide the schedule, there it is, of how we plan to move. So we will, as I said, we're targeting middle 600s this year, and then next year we'll go above 800. We should stay there. Even after that, there's still ultimately we get to just on 90% recoveries. But it's over a couple of years as we settle in our plan anyway. But the big sort of fixes are in this quarter. We're down for 35 days, and then we're down again in quarter four. And after that, we pretty much addressed the big equipment shutdowns to fix and tie in some additional equipment. Yeah. I mean, the key thing there is that the grades were significantly lower quarter on quarter, and that was really the big driver. Shall we move to the virtual platform? Thank you. To join the question queue, you may press star then one on your telephone keypad. You'll hear a tone acknowledging your request. If you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing any keys. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. Our first question is from Josh Wolfson with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks for taking my questions. Looking at the production guidance for both 2025 and also over the five-year outlook, the numbers have changed versus what was issued in November, even if we adjust for the impact of Mali in there. I'm wondering, is there any sort of fundamental changes in how the assets are being evaluated, or is this maybe reflecting some conservatism versus what the prior November budget was? Thanks. Hey, Josh. It's Graham. Yeah. So I think it's important to recognize that when we shared with you the graphs in November, we gave you these are graphs. They're a very small scale. So they're not really meant to be precise information. They're there to give you sort of directional information in terms of where the production is going and the overall impact of that production on costs, capital, etc. So we do revise these from time to time. And when you look at this one, there are some small changes that reflect some of the changes that have taken place in the business from November to now, some of the impacts of, for example, the slowdown in Loulo and some of the changes that we've seen across the rest of the portfolio. So I don't think you should get too focused on the granularity of the graph. It's really about the direction. Josh, what did you tell us that we've got to meet our guidance? And then you start trying to nitpick about the exact number. So I think we've looked at our guidance very carefully and made sure that we're focused on a range that we can deliver on. And we'll work from there going forward. But I think to Graham's point, the direction of travel and the fact that we're saying the growth out to 2029 is a minimum of 30% is the takeaway here. And when you look at the cash flow impacts of that, if you model them, you'll see what it means. And so, as you know, we've had this conversation for most of your career, you and I. And that is growing cash flow is a key part of what I've always been able to do. Production is important, but it's ultimately the value you get from those growth opportunities. We're very motivated with this. I think the other thing I would add is when you look at the quality of our people, we took our board over a period of two days through these feasibility studies with two separate teams that have been working on these studies for a number of years now. We've got a quality group of people quite capable of building out these big expansion projects. Ultimately, that's the new generation of leadership in Barrick that will come out of that along with our corporate team of subject matter experts. It's an exciting time. Definitely, everyone feels that we have the ability and the financial capacity to deliver on these expansions. One more question, if I can add. Just on Reko Diq, similar, there's been a number of articles that have continued in the press about possible buyers for a portion of the assets. It sounds like that deal has progressed a bit lower than maybe what we thought a year ago. I'm wondering, is there any kind of status updates that Barrick at least can issue? And then from the other perspective, if there isn't a deal that's announced for your partners in country, what is sort of the outlook for Pakistan to fund their portion of CapEx? Thanks. With the current funding lending group progress, there's absolutely no way that Pakistan would not be able to fund its share. And it has been up until now, funding its share as well. And we don't underwrite any part of the Pakistan investments. And so absolutely, there's no risk of that in my mind and in the lenders' minds as well because that's been one of the focuses that they had on the ability for the Pakistan side of the equity to be able to fund their share. I think the significance of an investment from Saudi Arabia is not lost on us and not lost on anyone. And again, as you know, we are very strong partners in Saudi with the Saudis and equally strong partners with the Pakistanis in Pakistan. We were always there to help and facilitate, but we're mindful that this is an ongoing discussion between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. I'm absolutely sure that there will come to some sort of arrangement sometime. Thank you. The next question is from Tanya Jakusconek with Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Great. Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you so much for taking my questions. I have four in total, two for Graham and technical from Mark. So I'm going to start with the financial ones, Graham. Just wanted to ask you about taking the write-down on Loulo-Gounkoto. I was a bit surprised with it, to be honest, because given historically, Porgera was able to operate on care and maintenance, was on care and maintenance for a while before your auditors looked at the carrying value of that asset. So my question is, number one, was there a change? I understand it's goodwill. And does that mean every quarter, if this asset isn't up and running, that we are going to be reviewing the carrying value? Thanks, Tanya. No, it doesn't mean we'll be reviewing it every quarter. Under the accounting rules, we were required to look for signs of impairment. And obviously, the engagement that we've had ongoing in Mali was a trigger for that. And on the back of that, we looked at our holding value and the potential outcomes in the future, which, of course, are multiple. And we had to make some assessments around that. And based on that, we considered that the goodwill that we had previously written up against this asset when Barrick acquired it in the Randgold transaction was no longer appropriate. And so it was on that basis that we've written it down. But we don't expect to have to do that on an ongoing basis. If there was a material change in the circumstances, which then had an impact on the potential future cash flows, well, we would assess it at that point. But that's not what we expect going forward. With reference to your comment about Porgera, it's all about what the holding cost was. So in the case of Porgera, the holding costs in our books were extremely low. And therefore, even though we had situations which might have caused us to look at whether there was an impairment because the cost in our book was very low, it never got to that point. Okay. All right. Thanks. My second financial, the follow-up on Anita's. I appreciate that these charts that you provide to us are directional. And I am coming back to the capital because directionally, the chart that was provided in Investor Day did show 2026 peaking at that 4.2-ish range on capital and then starting to decline in 2027, 2028, and 2029, which is a bit different than this sort of capital outlay of flatish for 2026, 2027. So there has been movement of capital. And it has to be more than just Loulo-Gounkoto, because that one's about $300 million. So just trying to understand what has been moved around. And you can make it fine. Tanya, just to be clear, when I answered Anita's question, it was really in the context of our specific guidance for 2025. With reference to your question, which is really about the longer-term outlook, yes, there have been changes in the sequencing of the timing of capital at those feasibility studies as we've got more details on the exact timing of the spend. So yes, there's some shifting between 2026, 2027, and 2028. But as you will have seen, in terms of the gross numbers that we previously gave guidance on for both the Lumwana project and the Reko Diq project, those total numbers haven't changed. So it's really just the timing of the spend as we incurred over the period of the projects. Yeah. No, thank you for that, and the 2025, which you majority of it was Loulo-Gounkoto, I thought we were running at about $300 million, but we could take it offline. My two other technical questions, if I could ask Mark. I wanted to come back to just Pueblo Viejo and the relocation program. I just remember from the mine tour that the tailings and the conveyor area, I think the relocation was about 1,500 people or thereabouts that had to be done over a period. Can you just confirm that that's still the case and that we need all of this to be done? I just don't remember when we have to have this done. I guess it depends on availability on what's next. So Tanya, we've spent a lot of time building in flexibility. And the focus is the starter wall and the starter dam. And so we can manage that. And also, we've looked at different accesses into the area, both into being able to start the construction of the starter wall and then looking at the bigger project. So again, we are managing this as a social program. As you know, we've done many of these before. And so we've built in some flexibility by just the approach that we've taken on the phases that we will enter. And the key for us, however, is to get the geotechnical drilling done so that we can build the starter dam and the foundations for the main walls. Because remember, this is a highly seismic area. So the construction of this dam is a highly engineered construction. To be able to do it and ensure that it meets all the criteria for that setting, we need to do a lot more geotechnical work than one would do for a standard tailings dam. Mark, on the critical path, what is on the critical path that you have to have the relocation of this to be here? Yeah. We've got out until 2029 to be able to have the starter dam functioning. Our original plan was to be quite well advanced with the main dam. Do you want to add to that, Simon? No. So we got till the end of 2029. And then there's still additional work ongoing, which has got some flexibility going into 2030. But obviously, our priority is to get the dam geotechnical work done, as you pointed out. Okay. And then just for that, Tanya, we have extended the El Llagal dam, which is the current dam, so with another lift. So we have built some flexibility into that. We're okay then for tailings until probably about 2030-ish. Would that be fair? That's pretty fair. But I mean, just point out, we're going to build this dam because otherwise, why are we doing all this work? Okay. And And just on this, is there any change to tax because of this additional starter dam and other? Right now, the estimated capital is that you're asking it, you're breaking up. But I mean, we're very comfortable with the current outlook on our estimates for the completion of this whole expansion. Okay. And then my final question, I just wanted to ask about Mark. You mentioned that you have the obligation in the joint venture to move Fourmile into the joint venture once you have that feasibility study. Is that a, if Newmont decides they do not want to participate in Fourmile for some reason, is that a unilateral right that you have to be able to displace material from the joint venture and put in Fourmile? So they have the obligation to take it in too. It's a put and call. And it's an automatic one. So if it meets the criteria as laid out in the joint venture agreement, we have the right to put it in, or obligation. And they have the obligation to accept it and settle the payment in cash or dilute. That's the option. So it's very clear. Of course, there's always opportunities for us to jointly agree on a different way of bringing it into the joint venture. But without a doubt, Fourmile has real value to all our shareholders in Nevada Gold Mines. Okay. Great. Thank you for. Pleasure. The next question is from Daniel Major with UBS. Please go ahead. Hi, Mark, Graham. Can you hear me okay? Hello, Daniel. I can hear you perfectly. Great. Thanks for the question. So just a couple. The first one on the buyback, Mark, you noted you intend to continue buying back stock. You bought back quite a lot in the fourth quarter. Can you give us any steer on how we should expect that, the kind of run rate? Is there a target, or is it very much kind of share price dependent? How How we should be thinking about the quantum of the buyback in subsequent quarters? We look at this in last quarter. We are managing a big capital program, cash flow. We've got higher commodity prices, stronger revenues. Very clearly, we have absolutely no hesitation to buy back our share when it's at sort of these low share prices. We'll continue to do that. At the same time, as you know, both Graham and I have shepherded our businesses through many challenging times. The one thing you don't want to be is beholden to the market as you go into a big capital program. We're mindful of that. We have all the facilities to be able to ensure that we get to where we want to get to. We'll make sure that we balance that carefully. As we've demonstrated, the run rate, as you point out, Dan, for quarter four was well over $1 billion a year. We look at this every day. We'll make the decisions on a daily basis. That's what we do. Okay. Thanks, Mark. And next one, just on your CapEx guidance, looking at the 1.7-1.9 of project CapEx, can you give us a breakdown of how much of that is going to Lumwana and to Reko Diq, approximately? I'm sure Graham's going to answer that. Dan, you got another question while he gets his head around that answer? Yeah. I could go for one more. So yeah, I appreciate the Mali situation. You can't comment on too much of the specifics. But you made it very clear that the outcome wouldn't impact the growth trajectory of the business. Can you just kind of clarify also whether it would have any impact on the project pipeline, funding decisions around major projects if you don't have that cash flow available to redistribute within the group for an extended period? No, we're very comfortable with where we are. We'll be able to manage it, and Dan, every day we have days like today with the gold price and copper price, we're building a cushion in the funding structure, and we've had a long time on that in the last three months. Very good. Yeah. So Dan, yeah, just to come back to your question then. As you'll see from the MD&A, we're guiding approximately $1 billion of spending on Reko Diq on a 100% basis. So our share of that would be just over half. And on Lumwana, we're guiding $600 million in capital spend for 2025. I think I would add that particularly in both cases, but in Lumwana, because it's got one circuit already running, that supports the financing. So higher copper prices really do bring down the exposure that Barrick has to support that expansion. Right now, with the outlook on copper and our own internal revenue generation capacity, these projects are becoming more affordable by the day as we collect, accumulate. That's why it's important for us to manage that net debt position as we go towards these bigger capital years. Thanks. Just a very brief follow-up on that, Graham, or either Mark or Graham, to be clear. You would expect to accrue the minority contributions to the Reko Diq capital as you spend them. So they'd show up in the P&L as a cash flow statement. Yeah. So from an accounting point of view, we're going to be consolidating that asset. So yes, you will see it from that point of view. But from a cash point of view, we're only funding effectively 55% of the project because there's a 10% free carried interest. So our 50 over 90 is about 55. So that's what we fund from a cash point of view. Great. Thanks a lot. Good luck. Thanks, Dan. The next question is from John Tumazos with John Tumazos Very Independent Research. Please go ahead. Thank you for taking my question, Mark. Pleasure, John. I'm looking at ways to try to convince an Agnico or Alamos Gold shareholder to buy Barrick instead. And it's not necessary to tell those shareholders that you're good managers because they know that. And they know that you built good mines. They're politically risk-averse people. And I was thinking of three tactics or minor repairs in your strategy that might help someone to buy the Barrick shares instead of the Agnico shares. And let me just see if any of these three minor changes appeal to you. One would be if you asked your exploration department to acquire a couple sub-$1 billion exploration and development projects with large resources to shift a part of your resource base to Canada. And the premiums, of course, are smaller for these development companies that need financing. A second tactic would be if you advanced Donlin Creek in Alaska, which is in the U.S., and it's a slower return project in a safer place. A third tactic would be if you had a corporate policy of reinvesting every penny of North American cash flow in North America, plus half of the cash flow from outside North America into North America to try to comfort the investors who are afraid of political risk in foreign countries. Do any of those things make sense to you, Mark? Yes, John, thanks for that advice. I think partially there's a bit of common sense in any one. I think the one point is that the world's changed. Maybe that was appropriate a year ago. But I think there's a very uncertain environment that has developed around both Canada and the United States. And again, we're very invested in the United States. And we are heavily invested in exploration and pursuing new opportunities, both in the United States and Canada, just as we are in all the other highly prospective regions. And so again, I think what will eventually drive those investors to invest in us is that we've demonstrated that we are a safe pair of hands with our shareholders' investments. We haven't asked them for anything for a very long time. And we've never diluted them. Today, if you look at where we are compared to where we were in 2019, we are a whole lot better off and a whole lot more valuable. We have done nothing to destroy that value. As you know, John, go back to 2011 and Randgold and all the M&A activity and the fact that we focused on just being a little bit more conservative and diligent in the way we invested our shareholders' cash. We separated us from the investors. A lot of people migrated from those highly overvalued assets or equities into the Randgold stock and made it the best performing gold stock ever. I think we set out to build something in Barrick. We were not completely aware of the challenges we had. We weren't prepared for the inflation and COVID and the sort of dynamic world that we've sort of entered into in the last couple of years. Everything's just been put on steroids in the last 28 days. So I think there's a big question mark everywhere about where to be and what to look for. What's been good for me is always focused on projects that make money in spite of the market. Both Lumwana and Reko Diq and PV, Pueblo Viejo, and Fourmile are all assets that will make money regardless. So as the market gets their head around the fact that we're still very clear and on top of that, there's no other gold company where the management own as much as what the management in Barrick own. We're very motivated to deliver against that plan. And I mean, just to get back to your three points, in a form, we would exercise any one of those, not necessarily exactly how you explained it. But each one of those ideas has an option that we've already discussed in our team. Thank you. The next question is from Joshua Rales with RFI Associates. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon. I want to thank you and your team, Mark, for your long-term commitment in acquiring reserves at a very low cost without diluting shareholders as I'm a long-term investor. I wanted to kind of continue on what Mr. Tumazos was saying in the sense that the generalist investor has been pretty absent with gold mining stocks in the last few years, even as the gold price has risen because it wasn't being realized at the bottom line due to higher costs and in some cases, lower production. It appears that your costs are stabilizing on the labor front and on inputs like oil. And I wanted to ask you, do you see that continuing, which is enabling the margins to really explode higher? And it would seem to me at some point the generalist investor is going to be awakened by these very rapidly increasing margins. Gold is up almost $900 since the beginning of last year, and you have all these tens of millions of dollars of reserves and the tens of millions of ounces of reserves in the ground that you've acquired at such a low cost. It seems like you're in the catbird seat, even with everybody focusing on Mali, which is like the tail wagging the dog as far as I'm concerned when I look as a long-term investor. Thanks, Josh. I mean, it's like you say exactly what I think. So the point here is that when we look at allocating, and let me start at the cost side first. First of all, you need to start looking at the cash cost, C1 cost, and then the all-in sustaining costs. And there's still quite a big delta, which we shared at Investor Day. so we'll bring that down as we address some of the ongoing sustainability investments or sustainable investments into projects, particularly in Nevada. But that is definitely, we're starting to manage that. And we're starting to forecast that decline in that extra capital sustaining capital requirement to fix our assets. And I would just add that the success of being able to roll forward your 10-year plans always comes with an extra sustaining capital because you've now got more requirement to put in additional maintenance capital because you've got a bigger ore body and a longer life. And getting back to your second point, I've been in this industry, I think, longer than you even. And the one thing is you go through these periods where the equity becomes very focused on trade. And the gold equities have rarely been about short-term trades. And we've now started seeing some of the longer-term investors come back in the stock. Certainly, all our big investors have grown their positions in our register again. And we've got to really spend more time accessing those longer-term pools of capital, which our investor team, investor relations team is focused on. And a lot of the real focus has been on the physical because of this obsession, and correctly so, of the high-risk nature of the global economy and the geopolitical situation across the world, including Canada and North America. So it is a very dynamic place. And so in my experiences, to survive in dynamics like that, because I grew in geopolitically very dynamic, I grew up in those sort of markets, is make sure that your assets are bulletproof as far as viability goes. And we've definitely got that. So I think we're in very good shape. And again, it's our job to be able to explain to people when you buy our stock, you have to buy it from another owner because we definitely don't issue it because we're also buying it in the market. So that in itself is a story of who we are in Barrick and our outlook for our business and ensuring that we continue to create value for our shareholders. And we're starting to get our head around that. And with the growth now and the decisions made, we can really look a little harder on how we can work, to John's point, to unlock that value. And we will do that. Thank you. Pleasure. There are no more questions from the conference call. All right, well, thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your time and those who phoned in, and again, as usual, our team is all available. You reach out to any of us or to our website, we'll be available to take questions, and for those shareholders on the call, we'll probably be speaking to you in the next day or two, so again, chat to you soon. Thank you again for your time. This concludes today's event. Should you have additional questions, please contact the Barrick Investor Relations Department. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.