Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to the Skouries Project Feasibility Study and Conference Call with Eldorado Gold Corporation. As a reminder, all participants are in listen-only mode, and the conference is being recorded. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To join the question queue you may press star then one on your telephone keypad. Should you need assistance during the conference call, you may signal an operator by pressing star and zero. I would now like to turn the conference over to Lisa Wilkinson, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead, Ms. Wilkinson. Thank you, operator, and good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to welcome you to our Skouries Feasibility Study conference call and webcast. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that we will be making forward-looking statements during the call. Please refer to the cautionary statements included in the presentation and news release. Joining me on the call today, we have George Burns, President and Chief Executive Officer, Brock Gill, Senior Vice President, Projects & Transformation, Joseph Dick, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, and Phil Yee, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Other members of the senior leadership team will also be available for the Q&A session. Our news release details the highlights for the Skouries Feasibility Study. You can find a copy of this news release on our website. It has also been filed on SEDAR and EDGAR. All dollar figures discussed today are US dollars unless otherwise stated. We will be speaking to the slides that accompany this webcast. You can download a copy of these slides from our website. After the prepared remarks, we will open the call for Q&A. At that time, we will invite analysts to queue for questions. I will now turn the call over to George. Thanks, Lisa, and good day, everyone. Today marks an important milestone as we continue to advance the Skouries project. The feasibility study news release issued earlier today reiterates the robust economics expected of a world-class asset with an after-tax IRR of 24% and an after-tax NPV of $1.8 billion using spot prices of $1,800 per ounce gold and $4.25 per pound copper. Once completed, the project will have a significant beneficial impact on Eldorado's overall production and cash cost. Skouries will also provide a foundation for regional growth through future exploration in the Halkidiki region in Greece. The Skouries project is aligned with our strategy of developing high-quality assets that add value to our growing company. As you can see in this slide, the potential impact of Skouries on Eldorado's production profile is about a 30% increase in gold production and a 40% reduction in total cash cost per ounce based on 2020 results, moving Eldorado to be one of the lowest cost producers among our peers. Eldorado has significantly de-risked the Skouries project in a number of ways, including through the infrastructure built to date, the amended investment agreement ratified by the Greek government in March 2021, and the feasibility study, which reflects an enhanced execution plan in a more sustainable project. I will now turn things over to Brock to walk you through the highlights of the feasibility study. Thank you, George. Hello, everyone, and thank you for your time today. I'm gonna take us through three areas. First, the economics. Secondly, the headline capital and the choices we made between the pre-feasibility and feasibility studies. Finally, the de-risking we have done to prepare ourselves for execution once the project is approved. The Skouries project represents an exciting opportunity for Eldorado. It's a high-grade gold-copper porphyry deposit that will be mined using a combination of conventional open pit and underground mining techniques. The project has strong economics with an after-tax IRR of 19% and an after-tax NPV of $1.3 billion based on the feasibility price assumptions of $1,500 per ounce gold and $3.85 per pound copper. The mine life is 20 years with an average annual production of 140,000 ounces of gold, an annual copper production of 67 million pounds, or an annual gold equivalent production totaling 312,000 ounces, with exploration upside to extend mine life. Using $1,500 gold prices, the average cash costs are -$368 per ounce sold over the life of the mine, and the average all-in sustaining cost is -$17 per ounce sold over the life of the mine. In the first five years, the average cash operating costs are expected to be -$435 per ounce. The payback period of this project is very compelling at less than four years, and it is expected to generate, on average, $215 million of free cash flow per year for these first five years of operation. I'm now going to take us through the capital and its evolution. The capital cost to complete phase one of the Skouries project is $845 million. As you can see on the slide, there's three major scope areas. First, the integrated waste facility and water management. A considerable portion of the capital cost to go is directed to establish Skouries as a best in class and sustainable gold mine, which Joe will speak to later. Process and infrastructure. This will complete the process and filter plants and materials handling, including a primary crusher and dry stack tailings. Mining will use the open pit material for the waste facility, and in the underground, it's comprised of 8,000 meters of development, the test stoping program, and supporting infrastructure. Moving on. Overall, there's been an increase in the capital cost from the pre-feasibility to the feasibility. There are four key areas contributing to the increased cost. The first area contributing to the increased capital cost is the execution model. Our project execution approach in the feasibility study reflects an EPCM delivery model with a tier one partner to ensure delivery of a quality facility that meets or exceeds operational targets of throughput, recovery, and OpEx. We've also incorporated our learnings during the initial construction phase, our current operations, and our effective management of COVID-19 into our training and execution strategies. An EPCM approach allows for reduction in interfaces and allows Eldorado to focus on operational readiness, training, governance, and working with our stakeholders. It also includes an additional factor to account for inflation during the execution period, which was not included in the pre-feasibility study. This change in execution model increased the capital cost estimate by $53 million or 8%. The second area is the increase in input costs over the past four years. The feasibility study has been updated to reflect the current commodity prices for steel, copper, and cement. The labor cost assumptions have also been updated. This area increased the capital cost estimate by $51 million or 7%. Third, we made a deliberate choice to upgrade water management infrastructure for resiliency to account for increased precipitation intensity, specifically including a larger contact water management pond, increase the capacity of the water treatment plant, increase the number of water reinjection wells, and update the spillway design. These choices will better position Skouries to handle major weather events through the life of the mine and eventual closure and improve safety at the mine site. We also made the choice to defer a portion of the underground mine to reduce execution risk and improve operational readiness. This focuses our efforts on the critical readiness areas of training and commissioning to achieve first gold through the open pit, processing, tailings, and water management. The underground activity is confined to the test stoping program and core infrastructure. This deferral will significantly reduce parallel activities and therefore risk. The overall CapEx for the underground has remained the same. Combined, the upgraded water management and open pit mining with underground test stoping increased the capital cost estimate by $33 million or 5%. The fourth and final factor is ex-foreign exchange. In the four years since the pre-feasibility study was published, the euro has strengthened against the US dollar. After adjusting the input estimates for current foreign exchange rates, the capital cost estimate increased by $19 million, which represents 3%. Skouries remains a very attractive and executable project that will have a positive impact on Eldorado and can be a cornerstone of the portfolio along with Kışladağ and Lamaque. At this point, I would like to shift gears and look at the significant de-risking activities that have been done on the project. Prior to entering care and maintenance, construction at the Skouries project was approximately 50% complete. This includes placement of major mill mechanical equipment, stripping of the open pit, and preparatory civil works. To further de-risk the project, the amended investment agreement was ratified in March 2021, which provides investor protection mechanisms, including a permitting framework, and enables a clear path to production and stable operations. Finally, the feasibility has now been completed and reflects a more executable project, specifically with regards to the underground deferral, water management, and the execution model. Essentially, we have made deliberate choices to build resiliency into this Skouries project by de-risking and optimizing, which results in confidence in the strong project returns. Eldorado has a successful track record of executing capital projects, including building the Lamaque mine and bringing it into commercial production in 18 months. Our recent completion of the decline connecting the Triangle mine with the Sigma Mill at Lamaque and the high-pressure grinding roll circuit at Kışladağ, which is expected to increase recovery at the mine by approximately 4%. We are confident that once approved, Eldorado will successfully deliver this Skouries project on time and within budget. I will now turn it over to Joe to highlight the social benefits of the project. Thanks, Brock. Eldorado's values are ESG based, and as such, are embedded into the Skouries project design, specifically through dry-stack tailings, water management, and CSR support. In the four years since Skouries was placed on care and maintenance, the external context has changed and societal expectations have been elevated. We are seeing this expressed by our communities and our investors. The evolution of these items have led us to deliberate choices in scope. I'd like to take a moment to talk about dry-stack tailings. We have mentioned it previously and it deserves highlighting. Eldorado's dry-stack tailings applications and experience at Efemçukuru and Kokkinolakkas are best in class. We are confident that our Skouries dry-stack tailings plan will add to that list. In recent years, we have all been witness to the tragedy associated with slurry tailings dam failures, the associated loss of life, and the environmental damage caused. Our dry-stack plan eliminates that risk. The additional benefit is it requires less space, reduces water consumption, and maximizes recovery of processed water for reuse. We see these combined benefits as the foundation for our choice to incorporate dry-stack tailings in the Skouries scope and see it as the type of decision-making that demonstrates our continued commitment as a responsible community partner. The Skouries water management plan, compliant with the Greek and EU legislation, is based on current view environmental modeling with higher storm intensity and higher return event frequency than prior versions. The water diversion, water storage, water treatment, and water injection well capacities are in line with the new water balance generated during this feasibility study. Again, scope choices that demonstrate our values and practice. The Skouries operating scope considers underground mine electrification to the fullest extent practical and full project deployment of technology to improve efficiency and decrease energy intensity. We will continue with energy and greenhouse gas studies to demonstrate our alignment with the Greek state and the EU as their efforts continue to reduce the carbon intensity of the Greek electrical grid. With respect to our local communities, the Skouries project will have a significant positive economic impact on the local economy. The operational readiness and training plans included in the Skouries feasibility study will ensure local hiring preference and provide skills that are transferable beyond mining. Over the life of the Kassandra mines, $80 million will be committed to CSR programs across community, cultural, social, environmental, and charitable purposes. This alignment of values, accomplished through advancing the common interests of all project stakeholders, has resulted in a better Skouries project as we advance towards project approval. It also provides the right touchstone as we continue to improve our ongoing operations. With that, I will turn it back to George for an update on the Skouries project financing and closing remarks. Thanks, Joe and Brock. The completion of the Skouries feasibility study supports our process of advancing financing for the project. We are evaluating all available options, including joint venture equity partners, project and debt financing, and lastly, streams. We are seeking attractive, competitive, non-recourse financing from Greek banks in the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Our focus on selecting a financing package will be driven by value optimization and de-risking for the future. Subject to financing and board review and approval, we would look to restart construction at Skouries in mid-2022. With timely completion of construction in two and a half years, low cost production from Skouries represents a significant upside in our five-year production profile. We continue to work hard to deliver this important milestone for our shareholders, employees, local communities, and other stakeholders. Finally, I want to thank our team for their hard work and effort in completing this study. As I have said before, we are looking forward to developing the Kassandra assets as a cornerstone of the company. The completion of this feasibility study puts us one step closer to reaching that goal and delivering value to all of our shareholders. Thank you for your time. I will now turn it over to the operator for questions from our analysts. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. To join the question queue, you may press star then one on your telephone keypad. You will hear a tone acknowledging your request. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing any keys. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. We will pause for a moment as callers join the queue. The first question comes from Kerry Smith with Haywood Securities. Please go ahead. Thanks, operator. Phil or George, could you just sort of break out roughly, even in percentage terms, how the CapEx would be spent over the 2.5-year build or maybe three years, let's say, starting in 2022, 2023, and 2024? Sure. I'll hand that one over to Brock. Yep. Thank you. Just in terms of the overall capital over those kind of few years, the $845 million is split roughly 30% into direct process and infrastructure, 22% in the open pit and underground, 14% in the waste facility and water management, and 34% in kind of indirect owners and contingency. In terms of the cost profile of that, it's kind of about, I wanna say, 15% in the first year, then the bulk into 2023, and then 2024, we come up into commercial production at the back end. 15% in 2022, and you're saying the bulk in 2023. 60%? I'm just trying to get a rough handle. 55%. If you want the actual numbers, it's about $168-$170 in year one, kind of $450-ish in the second year, and kind of the balance of about $225 in the third. Right. Okay. Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. The second question I had, maybe Brock might be able to answer. Just exactly what has been deferred on the underground? Are you just delaying the start of the underground development, and that's the only change, you just push it out a couple of years? Or could you just explain exactly what's been done? Yeah. Go ahead, Brock. Good. I think the way I would look at it is that the underground, we've got at the moment two adits coming in, and we've got about a kilometer and a bit on one and 900 meters on the other. We've got to connect the two as part of it. We've got a test stoping program that we're gonna focus on and the infrastructure to support those items. As I said, what we wanted to do was de-risk the startup of the mine and focus exclusively kind of on the underground, getting to first production through the open pit. We made a deliberate choice to defer. As you said, it's only. You're correct. It's only a deferral of about $60 million of the underground to the other side of first production. The total growth capital in the underground remains the same as it did in the PFS. It's a deferral for de-risking purposes. Okay. That deferral amount is about $60 million into the later production years. Correct. Okay. Okay, great. Just for the underground, can you just remind me how big the stopes are? I mean, you're gonna have to be up when the open pit finishes in year 11 or year nine or whatever it is. You're gonna be up 18,000 tons a day from the underground, which is a big number. Just remind me how big the stopes are that you expect to be mining there. Carey, this is Joe. How are you doing? Hi. Hi, Joe. Great, thank you. Generally, stope sizes are. They're 60-meter height, and that's what we're looking to validate in the test stoping program. You know, Carey, I'd have to go back and get the absolute other dimensions on them, but the biggest one is the stope height, but they're generally, in my recollection, about 20 meters in the other dimensions, so. Okay. You're gonna be, yeah, 4,000 or 5,000 ton stopes, maybe. I guess I'm just trying to think about how many stopes you need. It's a big number, obviously. Just wanting to get a better sense. Are there any permits that you would need between now and the start of construction, let's say the middle of next year, that you would need? I'm not talking about the small permits, but anything major, or is everything that's a large permit already in hand, it's just time that you need to apply for? Is it normal course of business? Yeah. Kerry, it's George. You know, if you go back to 2017 when Skouries was put into care and maintenance, at that point, we had all the environmental permits. The only exception was for dry-stack tailings. Obviously, that's a pretty massive improvement in environmental aspects of the projects and risk. We were in execution mode. What happened at that time, some of those construction permits were time-based, needed to be renewed, and the renewals were withheld. Since then, we have the revision to the EIA that enables us to deploy dry-stack tailings. That's in hand. We got that in Q2 of this year. All of the construction permits that were being withheld in 2017 have been approved. As you pointed out, there are some routine construction permits that'll unfold as the project advances, but we're in a ready to start mode from a permitting perspective. We've got a very supportive Greek government. We've got a good relationship with the regulators and we're very confident permitting is not gonna be an issue for us to advance the project. Okay. Okay. Let me just add. Kerry, I would just add that, in the FS and in our considerations, the permitting plan and transparency with that in the current government is well received, and I think sets us up well for execution. Right. Okay, great. Maybe just one last quick question for Phil. What would the percentage of the capital be in euros? Like, how much of your CapEx is actually denominated in euros? Do you have that number? Unfortunately, Carey, this is Brock, sorry, would have to get back to you on the euro breakdown. Okay. I'll check as we go through the call. Pretty significant. Yeah. I mean, it's gonna be the labor and some of the supplies are coming out of Europe, so it's a pretty good chunk. We'll get you a more exact number. Okay. Okay, that's great. Thanks very much, guys. Merry Christmas. Happy holidays. Yep. Thanks, Carey. The next question comes from Josh Wolfson with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Thank you very much. Just following up on some of those permitting questions that Carey had, the outstanding modification for the EIA for the Olympias processing and Stratoni port, is there any sort of linkage there with Skouries at all, or is that unrelated? Sure. Josh, this is Brock. Hello. The revision to the current EIA, as you suggested, is aimed at the expansion of the Olympias plant, which includes the port facility at Stratoni. The EIA as an entirety kind of encapsulates the other modifications we've made. The key point, as was just said, is that we have all the permits in place through the current EIA to commence construction at Skouries. As Joe said, I think a key piece to that also is that what we've done is we've developed an integrated schedule that ties our permitting with our execution and then changed our, what I would call our engagement approach with the regulators to assist us with better permitting approaches as we go through to understand their concerns. Maybe just to add to the timing. On the Olympias expansion, our plan was to submit the permit request this quarter, and we're on track to deliver that. We're expecting to have approvals on that expansion by roughly mid-next year. Josh, one last comment. There have been parliamentary or legislative changes in permitting in Greece that make the whole process a bit more manageable and a bit more transparent. We're pretty happy with that. Got it. Okay. Just a couple of details on some assumptions. Could you let me know what oil price assumption was used as well as the royalty and tax rate assumed? Phil, do you wanna handle the tax questions? Hi, Josh, it's Phil here. In terms of the royalty, you know, as part of the revised investment agreement, there was a 10% increase in the applicable rate, and the rate is based on the gold price at the time. It's, I think, for example, the current gold price around $1,800 equates to about EUR 1,300 per ounce on a euro basis. That's about, I think if I remember correctly, I don't have the table in front of me, but I think it was 3% at EUR 1,300. The 10% increase, that would kick it maybe 3.3%. The tax rate in Greece is currently at 22%. We do have some accumulated tax offsets, you know, like tax losses, but the upfront rate is 22%. Now, oil price, can I turn that over to Brock? I think we would have to, or we will have to defer the oil price conversation, and take it offline. I don't have that number on us. What I can say is that, you know, the oil price impact, given what we've got in front of us relative to other underground mining projects, is lower than most. Great. Thank you. Maybe one more. You know, when you think about labor productivity, you know, there have been some challenges at Olympias, and also just generally, you know, the uncertainties associated with COVID in terms of productivity and absenteeism and so forth. You know, how do you think about managing that risk, or what the effect is on sort of those items, when you think about scheduling or capital costs? Josh, and Brock will answer the productivity assumption for Skouries, and then maybe I'll follow up with some comments on Olympias. Yeah. The way we've looked at it is, in terms of building up our productivities, is we've taken, you know, the standard construction approach and how one builds it up, in terms of where we're at in the world, weather impacts. We've layered into that our experience in Greece. The challenges that you've mentioned. Some of that is played out obviously in our choice of execution model, as we said earlier. We've basically come up with our productivity factor. You know, it's what I'm gonna speak is an average, it's obviously by discipline of around 1.3, with most being north of 1.3. Probably a bit of color that's worth noting on this is with a site that's approximately 50% built, and much of that is in the process plant. Standard construction risks of getting out of the ground in terms of civil work and mill placements in those highly constrained areas, as well as the structural steel that sits over top of the mechanical equipment that's already set is behind us. The productivities within the plant are going to be pulling cabling and piping. From a critical path perspective, you know, that's not on it because the plant is built. Most of our work, 50% of it sits in concrete and civils, and those are areas that allow for multiple work fronts and crews in at the same time. I think from a productivity factor, we've got not only the right ones in there, but it's de-risked from the type of discipline work that's in front of us. Joe? Relative to Olympias, you know, kind of break this into two things, Josh. First of all, the collective bargaining agreement, we're engaged with labor there and, you know, the specific topics that we're looking at, I think you mentioned several of them. You know, certainly productive time and, you know, rather than, you know, kind of historically what we've seen around, you know, cost of living increases, we're shifting the thinking toward, more towards, pay for performance, and, you know, that's going reasonably well. If you turn ourselves in towards the, you know, what's happening inside the Olympias mine, you know, we focused pretty hard on drill and blast over the last number of months. You know, with any mine, getting that right sets you up for the rest of the cycle. We're pretty pleased. Our drilling performance from a perspective of drill quality is much improved, and we're seeing that in lower dilution and at the same time, higher mining recoveries resulting in better grade to the mill right now. You know, as I look forward to that, and as we continue on the cycle, you know, feeling pretty good about it. From a people side, a real focus on leadership and safety as the right things to drive behavior. You know, training and direct communication with labor is significantly better than it's been. You know, as we begin to deploy technology in Olympias, you know, we're pretty pleased with where we sit. It's been a long road, but it's deeply ingrained culture, but we're making progress and happy with where we're at today and how this is gonna play out. All right. Thank you very much. The next question comes from David Haughton with Global Mining Research. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator. Thank you, George, Brock, Joe, and Phil for the update. I've got a couple questions. Firstly, having a look at the press release, page eight you've got a very handy projection of cash flows and years stated at the top. Should we assume that year one is 2025, or is that not an accurate statement? Yes, this is Brock. Thanks very much. Yeah. The first goal is roughly the end of 2024. When you look at your table, you could say year one is predominantly 2025. Okay. If we make that simplifying assumption, then that would work out rather well. Second question, back to rescheduling of the underground. When would you expect phase one of 2,500 tons per annum to start, and how long would it take to ramp up to the 2.5 million tons per annum? Start at phase one underground and the ramp up time, please. Sorry, this is Brock again. The deferral is about a two-year deferral approximately, and it's about seven years to get to the production rates. Okay. You'd be starting the underground in 2027, meaningful production? Yeah. Probably a little later than that. Just trying to do the math. Basically, what we did is, like I said, 18-24 months production. We've got some optionality in there is why I'm saying that. We could, based on, you know, success as we bring up Skouries or some questions around how we do it, we can accelerate or slow the underground, which is the excellent part about having an open pit in front of us. You know, that's the optionality we have. Think of first goal is the end of 2025, we'll call it 2025, as you said, to simplify it. We're really into 2028 when we start to produce, call it, in a meaningful fashion. Then, as we said, about seven years after that. It's a few-year ramp up. That seven-year ramp up, is that to the 2.5 million tons per annum, or does that take us through to the phase two level of 6.5 million tons per annum? We're assuming about a four-year ramp up to 2.5 million tons per annum once we get through test stoping and kind of locked and loaded the mining method and the design. Okay. Just for clarity then on the start of phase two underground production, when would we expect to see that commence? Well, we have a nine year open-pit life. Yeah. You know, you assume that four-year ramp up to 2.5 million tons. Yeah. The infrastructure to push the underground to the next level starts shortly thereafter. Year 2027, I believe. Okay. We hit 2.5 million tons, and then subsequent to that, we're investing in phase two of the underground. Okay. All right. Just last one on the underground. I'm thinking here about mining costs. What sort of mining costs would you expect for the underground operations? Right here, looking for that number. About $19 a ton in the underground. Okay. When I have a look at page two of the release, I can see that the life of mine cost is $13 per ton processed. Is that a blend of open pit and underground, or is that only for the open pit? That's a blend. Okay. Gotcha. As you said, that's per ton ore. Yeah. Yeah, it's a blend of underground and open pit mining per ton of ore processed. Okay. Which I guess at the end of the mine life is the same as well. The $19 per ton that you just provided me, is that on the underground tons moved or is that also a processed number? It's $19 per ton of underground mined, and it's $5 per ton of open pit mined. Okay. All right. Thank you very much for clarifying all of that, and I hope you guys have a great Christmas and a good New Year. Thank you. Once again, if you have a question, please press star then one. The next question comes from Michael Jalonen with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Oh, hi, George and everyone. I just wanted to drill down on the financing package. How much you're looking at, and I believe you mentioned streams. You know, just, was it yesterday? The Artemis Gold obviously entered into Blackwater gold stream, $300 million, about 25,000 ounces a year, 35% gold price cash cost. Just wondering if that's what the ballpark you're looking at and versus debt, versus JV partner. Just some more clarity, please, if you don't mind. Sure. Thanks for the question, Mike. I mean, at a high level, we've been talking for quite some time about our financing strategy, and it really remains unchanged. We're set up now with this feasibility study to engage with strategic partners on equity injection at the Kassandra level, so for Skouries and Olympias. That's a primary part of our strategy. Second, we're looking at project debt financing. I think the thing we've stated in today's remarks is that we've got some fairly attractive financing alternatives through Greek banks and EU COVID relief funding. That's just entered into the fray in the last couple of months, and the pricing around that looks pretty attractive, so we're obviously pursuing that. We've also looked at kind of some of the international banks financing. Streams has also been part of our strategy. You know, there's probably a plus and a minus there that the terms around streams have improved pretty significantly in the last couple of years. The other side of this coin, though, is these are multi-decade assets with great exploration potential, and so when you bolt on a stream, you're paying for that throughout the life of the operation. You know, there's plus and minuses to every one of these alternatives. As I said in my prepared remarks, we're gonna make the ultimate decision on the overall financing package on the value that we get out of that, each one of those funding opportunities, and the degree to which it de-risks the future operating and results from these assets. You know, at this point, we're pursuing all the alternatives, and we're gonna come up with the best blend to give us maximum value. When would that be? Do you have a target date for the Oh, the date? Just when you have this arranged. I mean, we're still with this news out. We're still focused to try to get this across the line in the first quarter. You know, as we stated, we're right now thinking if we can get construction started at mid-year. It gives us all of Q1 and part of Q2 to try to wrap up this financing and set up Brock and team to start executing so. I guess the other important factor we mentioned in our opening remarks is we still gotta get to the board and go through our due diligence from a capital investment perspective and seek their approval. I think it's safe to say we'll be targeting a Q2 financing and a mid-year start up of construction. That's our objective right now. Okay. Thanks. Just one last question. I just noticed the copper price from the old feasibility study, $2.75-$3.85 a pound. Big hike. What was that based on? Well, I mean, if you look at the change in the last four years with the focus on greenhouse gas emissions and electrification of the planet, I think most analysts have increased their copper price on the short, medium, and long-term. We've tied our metal price assumptions based on, you know, our look at analyst consensus pricing and think the prices assumed in this feasibility study are appropriate for, you know, where we're at in the market today. I'm a believer that, you know, there is gonna be a pretty big focus on electrification of the planet, and copper prices are gonna be strong for the foreseeable future. I guess, like, maybe Bank of America wasn't in your consensus 'cause we're at $3.10 on a real basis. Okay, well, thanks for that and good luck. Thanks, Mike. Once again, if you have a question, please press star then one. The next question comes from Carey MacRury with Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead. Hey, everyone. Just one question for me. In terms of, you know, you've talked in the past about pursuing a partnership at Skouries. I'm just wondering how that's going and how you think about moving ahead on a 100% basis versus having a partner. Yeah. Again, we're still focused on finding the appropriate joint venture partner to inject capital and de-risk the project. We've had a number of parties that have been at the table for up to two years. We have a group of potential partners that are just now at the table, those I call strategic partners, peer companies. In the end, we're finally now in the position to be able to negotiate terms. The feasibility study was kind of the last piece of the puzzle to be able to sit down and negotiate terms for us to determine what the right funding mechanism is for Skouries. At the end of the day, again, our decision is gonna be based on how those prospective partners value the project versus our other funding opportunities. I would tell you, nothing's really changed. Same overall approach. We're now getting down to the point where we can talk real numbers and start focusing on the right funding formula. Just based on that, like, you know, based on your outlook of the project, just completing the feasibility, are you comfortable going 100% if necessary or how do you think about that? I think if you look at what we've done over the last couple of years at Eldorado, we've positioned ourself well that could be an option. It's not the preferred option, but it is an option. I couldn't have said that six months ago. We refinanced the balance sheet a few months ago. One of the key objectives in that refinancing was to give us maximum flexibility for funding Skouries, and we were able to deliver on that. You know, it is an option, but again, it's hard for me to anticipate what the right answer to this question is without knowing the value offered by prospective JV partners. Stay tuned. Hopefully, we'll have that answer in a number of months. No, that's fair enough. Then maybe an unrelated question just on the reserve update tonight. Just the update at Lamaque. It looks like you've had a lot of exploration success, but it looks like there's not a lot of ounces out of that. Is that just a function of time there, or is there anything specific happening on Lamaque specifically? It's primarily a function of timing. You know, our drill cutoffs are mid-year. We're continuing to work forward on Ormaque as well as lower Triangle and extensions on Triangle. We're pleased with how it's coming, as well as, you know, satellite targets that we're working our way through. Lamaque, we remain highly positive. Yeah. I might just characterize this. If you look at our acquisition just a few years ago, 2017, and we put it into commercial production in 18 months, and every year, we've replaced the reserves. If you look at the maiden pre-feasibility study that was put out, the Lamaque peak production level at that point was 130,000 ounces per year. We're now in excess of 200,000 ounces as a peak production, and we've replaced the reserves we've mined each year and grew it a bit. To me, that's a great deal of success. We've got a larger footprint now for more discovery. We're advancing on our Lamaque, and we still have what we believe is great potential at the deeper portions of Triangle. In my mind, our exploration success thus far has been extremely good, and I think there's a great future in front of us. Great. That's it for me. Thanks, guys. Thank you. Thanks, Carey MacRury. Once again, if you have a question, please press star then one. Operator, if there's no further questions perhaps, we can wrap up with a couple of comments. Please proceed. All right. Well, really, happy to be able to get this feasibility study out to replace the pre-feasibility study. I think this positions us extremely well now to advance on financing and position us for a restart. I was gonna ask Brock to maybe recap a little bit on some of the questions that we had earlier on the schedule. Yeah. Thanks, George. Just two quick ones for me. One, there was a question on euro-denominated parts of the estimate. It's about 65% euro denominated, is the answer to that one. I just thought it might be helpful to recap the underground conversation because there were a few different folks that asked kind of slightly the same question around what was deferred and what does the schedule look like. Thinking of those couple questions, I would say, you know, essentially, we're trying to take advantage of the fact that we have a fully stripped pit, and we're at the top of the ore body, which allows us to do some optionality, at the same time to reduce execution risk and allow us also to focus on getting an asset up and operating. How that plays into the schedule, it's an 18 months deferral, just simply put. We've then got a kind of consistent ramp from 400,000 tons to 1.2 to 2.5. Kinda that starts in 2027, and we get to the 2.5 million tons in 2028. Then in year eight is where we get to the second phase of the underground production. Those things together, and then obviously the open pit starts tapering off at that point. Kind of a very sequenced approach that we think leads to the best mine plan and the most de-risked approach that creates some optionality. Maybe just one last point on the capital cost. If you look at the pre-feasibility and the feasibility study, both anticipated initial capital up to commercial production. Both studies had a second phase of underground growth capital, and both obviously have the life of mine sustaining in it. When you start digesting pre fees versus fees, you've got to look at the total picture. Any other questions in the queue, operator? There are no more questions from the phone lines, and this concludes the question and answer session and today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating, and have a pleasant day.