Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Turquoise Hill third quarter financial results conference call. At this time, all lines are in a listen-only mode, and following the presentation, we will conduct a question and answer session. If at any time during this call you require immediate assistance, please press star zero for the operator. This call is being recorded today, Wednesday, November 3, 2021, and I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Roy McDowall. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you, Michelle. Good morning. I'm Roy McDowall, head of investor relations and communications. Welcome to our third quarter 2021 financial results conference call. On Tuesday, we released our third quarter 2021 results press release, MD&A, and financial statements. These items are available on our website and SEDAR. With me today on the call is Steve Thibeault, our Interim CEO, Luke Colton, our CFO, and Jo-Anne Dudley, our COO. This call and presentation includes certain forward-looking statements and information. We refer you to the forward-looking statement section of the annual information form dated March 8, 2021, supplemented by our MD&A, the three and nine months ended September 30, 2021. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Steve. Thank you, Roy, and good morning to everyone. Thank you for joining us for our third quarter 2021 earnings call. Joanne, Luke, and I will be available for Q&As following our presentation. Please note, slides two and three contain our cautionary statements, and I would encourage you to read through them. Turning to slide five, the Oyu Tolgoi open pit and underground workforce posted an All Injury Frequency Rate of 0.13 for the nine months ending September 30, 2021, an improvement over the rate from the six months ended June 30, 2021. This is an impressive achievement considering the challenges posed by COVID-19. The open pit operation continued uninterrupted through the quarter and produced 41,900 tons of copper and over 130,000 oz of gold. We are maintaining our 2021 production guidance of 150,000 tons-180,000 tons of copper and 400,000 oz-480,000 oz of gold. Although the site operated at less than 50% of its planned personnel levels in the third quarter due to the COVID personnel restrictions, the team was able to make progress on the underground project. The sinking of Shaft 4 was restarted during the quarter, and in October, we began the commissioning of the Material Handling System 1. While the volume of concentrate shipments to customers improved during Q3 versus Q2, site inventory remains above target levels, and consequently, we will maintain our force majeure until that imbalance is corrected. All technical undercut readiness activities have been completed, and Oyu Tolgoi, from a technical perspective, have been ready since July 2021 to commence the undercut. Undercut commencement remains delayed by a number of factors, including the pending resolution of certain non-technical criteria essential for the start of the caving operations, obtaining the approval of all OT LLC board directors for additional investment to progress the underground development, to green light the negotiations with the project finance lenders on debt reprofiling, obtaining outstanding required regulatory approval and securing an agreement on the pathway to meet Oyu Tolgoi long-term power requirements. All of these issues are the subject of ongoing discussion between the company, Rio Tinto, and the government of Mongolia. Having just returned from six weeks in Mongolia, where I was involved in negotiation, I can say that I was encouraged by the good effort of all parties to reach a solution so that the underground development can achieve success through a process of mutually beneficial cooperation. I can also attest that all parties are aware of the urgent need to remove the obstacles to the start of the undercut to prevent further delays and to preserve the economic value of the project. To further that process, TRQ and Rio Tinto recently tabled a comprehensive proposal for the government that we believe addresses the government's key concerns and ensures that the project remains a compelling value proposition for all partners. From a financial perspective, our base case incremental funding requirement has increased to $3.6 billion as at September 30 from $2.4 billion at the end of Q2. The increase reflects preliminary information provided by Oyu Tolgoi regarding the impact of the delay to the initiation of the undercut, as well as additional underground development capital of $140 million in known COVID cost impacts. Our available liquidity of $0.8 billion is expected to be sufficient to fund the company's requirements, including funding of underground capital expenditure into Q3 2022. Slide six showcases both the excellence of the Oyu Tolgoi team and the contributions gold provides to our C1 cash costs. During Q3, Oyu Tolgoi produced approximately 42,000 tons of copper and over 130,000 oz of gold. This was an increase over Q2, and was driven by the scheduled move to the R grade areas of phase IV- B. Mill throughput remained above nameplate capacity, but was slightly lower than Q2 due to the processing of harder ore, as well as lower SAG mill availability due to maintenance. For the remainder of 2021, we expect that the mill feed will continue to be comprised of R grade phase IV- B and lower grade stockpile. We remain on track to meet our updated 2021 production guidance of 150,000 tons-180,000 tons of copper and 400,000 oz-480,000 oz of gold. With that, I will turn the call to Luke. Thanks, Steve, and good morning to everyone. If you could please turn to slide seven, I'll provide a summary of our key financial metrics. Revenue for Q3 2021 increased by 135.6% from Q3 2020. Gold revenue increased by $193 million, and that's driven by a 338% increase in the volume of gold and concentrates sold. That's due to mining higher grade areas of phase IV-B, partially offset by a 6% lower gold price. Copper revenue increased by $164 million from Q3 2020, and that's due to a 44% higher copper price and a 35% increase in copper volumes due to higher grades. Cash generated from operating activities before interest and tax was $355 million in Q3 2021, and that's $262 million higher than Q3 2020. Q3 2021 gross margin was $324 million higher, due mainly to the increase in revenues. This is partially offset by unfavorable movements in working capital and deferred revenue, as contingency measures put in place during Q2 2021 to improve OT short-term liquidity unwound during Q3 2021. Income per share attributable to owners of TRQ decreased from $0.64 per share in Q3 2020 to $0.17 per share in Q3 2021. This decrease mainly reflects the impact of a $300 million deferred tax asset derecognition in Q3 2021, which arose as a result of an overall weakening in taxable income forecasts due to the underground delays. This impact was partially offset by the increase in gross margin previously mentioned. C1 cash costs and all-in sustaining costs in Q3 2021 both benefited from a $193 million increase in gold revenue credits versus Q3 2020. For all-in sustaining costs, this benefit is partially offset by the higher royalties that OT paid on the higher revenue. Capital expenditure in Q3 2021 was $217 million, and that's comprised of $201 million underground and $16 million open pits. Capital expenditure for the same period last year was $255 million. The ongoing impacts of COVID-19 restrictions and controls drove the lower than expected capital expenditure and are expected to continue into Q4 2021. As a result, TRQ's full year capital guidance has been reduced. $80 million-$100 million for the open pits is the revised guidance, and for the underground it's $0.8 billion-$0.9 billion. If I could get you to turn to slide eight, you'll see that Turquoise Hill had liquidity of $0.8 billion at the end of Q3 2021, which it expects will be sufficient to meet the company's requirements into Q3 2022. As disclosed in the company's Q3 2021 production update, its base case incremental funding requirement increased to $3.6 billion, and that's primarily as a result of the forecast delay to sustainable production for Panel 0, which is now expected to be in H1 2023, which is broadly in line with the forecast six-month delay to undercut commencement. Additionally, TRQ's base case incremental funding requirement incorporates other assumptions, including updates to metal price assumptions, the Definitive Estimate which estimated a development capital cost of $6.75 billion, COVID-19 restrictions through the end of Q3 2021, which have resulted in a cumulative increase of $140 million to the estimate included in the DE, and that's through the end of September 2021. The impact of the open pit mine redesigns in response to previously reported geotechnical events. The resequencing of open pit ore phases due to the delayed commitment of the undercut and, of course, the impact of COVID-19 restrictions and controls on the open pit waste movement. Further information on all of that is provided in the company's Q3 2021 MD&A. The company's estimated incremental funding requirement, as well as its liquidity outlook, will continue to be impacted, either positively or negatively by various factors in addition to the aforementioned, and many of those are outside the company's control. To address its forecast funding and liquidity requirements, the company's funding plan includes the Heads of Agreement reached with Rio Tinto in April 2021. Of course, its successful implementation is subject to achieving alignment with the relevant stakeholders, including Rio Tinto, existing lenders, potential new lenders, and the government of Mongolia, as well as market conditions and other factors. Those factors would include resolution of the remaining outstanding non-technical undercut criteria and other items that form part of the ongoing negotiations with the government of Mongolia. Any significant further delays to the initiation of the undercut or non-fulfillment of any of the other CPs identified in the Heads of Agreement could adversely affect the ability of the company and OT LLC to obtain additional funding or reprofile existing debt as contemplated within the timeframe set out in the Heads of Agreement. However, the company is currently in discussions with Rio Tinto to consider potential adjustments to the timeframe and other aspects of the Heads of Agreement, which would help to address the company's forecast funding and liquidity requirements. With that, I'll hand over the call to Jo-Anne Dudley, our Chief Operating Officer. Thank you very much, Luke. Let's turn to slide nine for the underground development and exploration update. COVID-19 continued to significantly impact the Oyu Tolgoi mine in Q3 2021. Constraints on personnel numbers on site and domestic and international travel adversely impacted both open pit operations and the underground project. The additional 2021 development cost impact of the known COVID-19 delays up to September 30, 2021, is estimated to be approximately $140 million. As COVID-19 remains ongoing, the company will continue to monitor impacts and update the market as appropriate. Despite COVID-19 challenges, commissioning of Material Handling System 1 commenced during the quarter. While not required for undercut commencement, a fully commissioned Material Handling System 1 is required for sustainable production. While shafts 3 and 4 did not progress during Q3, Shaft 4 sinking recommenced in October, which is a great step forward for the project. Readiness work for Shaft 3 sinking continues to progress. Although shafts 3 and 4 are not required to support the commencement of Panel 0, they are required to support productions from panels 1 and 2 during the ramp up to 95,000 tons per day. The commencement of the undercut is a key milestone, and it is critical to ensure that once commenced, the undercut and drill point construction continues unimpeded. From a technical perspective, all lateral development and production drilling to initiate the undercut is complete, and supporting infrastructure for Panel 0 production is on track for completion under the current site conditions. Exact timing of the undercut is dependent on the satisfaction of remaining outstanding non-technical criteria. I'll now cover exploration progress in the quarter. Turquoise Hill, through its wholly owned subsidiaries, Asia Gold Mongolia LLC, Heruga Exploration LLC, and SGLS LLC, operates an exploration program in Mongolia on three licenses that are not part of Oyu Tolgoi. Despite restrictions on people movements in the Ömnögovi and Dornogovi provinces in Q2, the exploration team was able to fully complete our planned 2021 fieldwork during Q3. Safety remains our first priority, and appropriate measures will be maintained to protect our exploration team, contractors, and the communities in which we work. Reaffirming our commitment to local communities, the exploration team made COVID-19 aid donations to the Mandakh and Khanbogd sums during the quarter. With that, I'll now hand the call back to Steve. Thank you, Joanne. Turning to slide 10, I would like to focus on the key milestones to take us to sustaining production of Panel 0. As we have stated before, from a technical perspective, Oyu Tolgoi has been ready to initiate the undercut since July 2021. Despite the COVID-19 related constraint, Q3 saw the breakthrough of the conveyor decline, Shaft 4 sinking recommence, and preparatory work for the Shaft 3 sinking has continued. The breakthrough of the service decline is forecast for this month, and completion of the Material Handling System 1 and the first on-footprint truck chute are broadly in line with the Definitive Estimate. The Oyu Tolgoi team, from my point of view, have done an amazing job. The key outstanding issue facing Oyu Tolgoi is resolving the non-technical criteria to initiate the undercut. Primary among these is obtaining the approval of all the directors of Oyu Tolgoi board for the necessary additional investment to advance the underground development. The longer the delay in approving the budget uplift, the greater the risk that Oyu Tolgoi will have to slow down work on the underground. We continue to engage with the Mongolian government and Rio Tinto to resolve all the outstanding non-technical issue that must be resolved before caving operation can commence. To further that process, TRQ and Rio Tinto have tabled with the government a comprehensive proposal that we believe addresses the government key concerns while maintaining economic value of the project for all stakeholders. Before I open the line for Q&As, I want to express my appreciation for the effort of the Oyu Tolgoi team. They delivered a solid performance in Q3 under what continued to be challenging circumstances. Thanks to them, we had good production from the open pit and were able to advance elements of the underground with less than half of the number of worker planned. That they were able to do this while maintaining Oyu Tolgoi safety performance is noteworthy and commendable. With that, we will begin the Q&As. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press the star followed by the one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, please press the star followed by the two. If you are using a speakerphone, please lift the handset before pressing any keys. Please stand by for your first question. Your first question comes from Jackie Przybylowski of BMO. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. I guess my first question, I know in the release that you gave some guidance in terms of delays for shafts 3 and 4 and for panels 1 and 2, and you've given those in number of months of delay from the previous disclosure in the Definitive Estimate. I can't find in the Definitive Estimate where those timelines were previously disclosed. Could you either tell us when you're expecting now shafts 3 and 4 and panels 1 and 2, or at least what the Definitive Estimate was envisioning for those? Because I just can't see it. Thank you. Okay. Jo-Anne, do you want to take that question? Yeah, sure. Thanks, Steve. Thanks, Jackie. In the Definitive Estimate, we haven't given the exact date. Certainly in the technical report, we gave some indications. Ultimately, what's important about those shafts is that they are supporting infrastructure for the ongoing development of Panel 2, which is the next panel that will be mined following Panel 0 and Panel 1. You know, as per the disclosure in the MD&A, we have highlighted the important time frames that drive impact to the ramp up. We've focused on what's important when it comes to the ramp-up of the mine to 95,000 tons a day. Hopefully that's helpful. Yeah. I guess, I mean, I hope you can appreciate it's a little difficult for us. You've said, so for example, Shaft 3 and Shaft 4 have a nine-month delay, but we don't really know from what to what, you know. It's just a little bit difficult for us to model that. I mean, if there's any other kind of color you can give. I guess we can work with the info that you give if that's all that we can have. Mm-hmm. Okay. Anyways, maybe I'll just ask a different question. We saw yesterday, one of your shareholders put out an open letter and was asking for some clarity on what your response to the independent review of geotechnical issues or sort of of delays and cost overruns would be. Is there any information or response or color that you can give in terms of what Turquoise Hill's view of that independent report is or what your response to that might be? Yeah. Jackie, what we're doing, we're conducting a detailed review of that particular report. Okay? I will highlight that that report is a confidential report at the OT board, but we're conducting a detailed review. We're seeking a number of different clarification and supporting detail, explanation for certain broad conclusions that were in the report. Once we will have concluded this detailed review, we'll update the market as appropriate. Okay. Thank you very much. That's all my questions. Thank you, Jackie. Your next question comes from Orest Wowkodaw of Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. I've got a couple questions too. First of all, can you walk us through the increase to the funding gap from $2.4 billion- $3.6 billion? A couple angles to this, like, your estimated liquidity runway of Q3 2022 is unchanged, right? To me, that would suggest that really the funding gap from a timeline perspective is further out. Maybe, you know, what would be really helpful for us to get some color is what kind of commodity assumptions are baked into this? What kind of production assumptions from the open pit are baked into this for 2022, 2023, and I guess 2024? Maybe we could start there, if possible. Okay, very good. Luke, you want to take that question? Yeah. Sure, Steve. Happy to do that. Thanks for the question. There are actually a few questions in there, so I'll do my best to answer them, and if I miss anything, please do let me know. At a high level, you know, we did have a sort of $1.2 billion increase to the funding gap in the quarter. You'll remember from our Q2 2021 MD&A that the funding gap at that time increased from $2.3 billion-$2.4 billion. That was primarily due to a sequencing of ore phases of the open pit mine, and that was largely offset by improved commodity price forecasts. In terms of commodity price forecasts, you know, what we use effectively is consensus pricing at the balance sheet date. That's the assumption that we use. For Q3 2021, the primary cause of the increase from $2.4 billion- $3.6 billion is the deferral of revenue caused by the delay to the start of the undercut and sustainable production. There's also additional COVID-19 related costs of $40 million in the quarter, and that brings the total, as of September 30, 2021, to $140 million. You know, the company has, you know, repeatedly and consistently warned that, you know, a significant delay to the start of the undercut would have a material impact on project schedule, including the timing of sustainable production for Panel 0. That could adversely impact the timing of expected cash flows from the underground, thereby increasing the amount of the incremental funding requirement. Obviously, when that became apparent in Q3 2021, we felt it was important to update the market, and that's what we've done. Let me stop there. Hopefully I've answered most of your questions, but let me know if you've got any follow-up there. Well, I guess what kind of production assumptions are baked in to this estimate over the next few years? Yep. We haven't actually issued production guidance beyond 2021. We are still working to be able to issue our production guidance for 2022, so I'm probably not gonna be able to answer your question, you know, super specifically. Obviously the impact of the six-month delay to sustainable production is having the impact of some of the anticipated underground production out into later periods. That's, you know, what's causing the main reason anyway, that's causing the funding gap over the sort of critical period, which is kind of 2022 through 2024. Okay. Then in the release two weeks ago, it disclosed your estimate for Panel 0 sustainable production was January 2023. In the release today it says just H1 2023. I realize January is in H1, but are we to interpret that it's slipped well beyond January at this point? Jo-Anne, would you like to give some color to that change that we did? Yes. No problem. Thank you, Steve. Thank you, Orest. Yes. We've had more time with information since the QOR release, and if we look back at the technical report, OTTR20, broadly the time frames between the key milestones laid out in the OTTR20 remain consistent with the current plan. We have had a six-month delay to the commencement of undercut and a similar delay consequently to sustainable production. But we need to remember, we actually haven't started the undercut yet. There does remain some uncertainty here, and the disclosure reflects that. It is important that the remaining items preventing the commencement of the undercut are resolved as quickly as possible, and the team is very focused on working with our stakeholders to achieve that. Okay. Maybe final question from me, at this point. Do you see any opportunities to improve this funding gap through resequencing of the open pit or perhaps resequencing something in the underground? Is there any opportunities to reduce that $3.6 billion number at this point? Jo-Anne, do you have a bit of color around the optimization? Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Yes. So the team are working on developing and investigating optimization opportunities to try to bring metal forward into the funding gap period. We're in the preliminary stages of that analysis. It's important to note that, you know, while we will do everything we can to accelerate the work, we believe our current forecast is realistic and achievable. It is a normal process for Oyu Tolgoi to look for these opportunities to bring metal forward, and there is some time for that to happen. The optimization work will continue and, you know, we will come back and announce any results of the work when we are able to. Okay. Sorry, one more if I could. Just, Steve, you talked about that you're reviewing the results of the independent consulting group. I mean, that report was submitted three months ago. When could we realistically anticipate that your review of your questions and clarification is completed and the market can update there? What's the timing? No specific timing, but I could say that we're getting close to be finalized. Like I said, for us, it's important to have a good review and have the supporting detail for the explanation. We're working on that. It should be. It will come, I can tell you. Will it come this year, or is it likely now a 2022 event? Orest, my goal would be that it would come this year. Okay? Okay. But, uh- Thank you. I mean, it's not, the review is not finished, and that could change. My wish would be that it would be completed this year. Okay? Thank you. Thanks, Orest Your next question comes from Craig Hutchison, TD Securities. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, everyone. Just a follow-up question on the fin- Good morning, Craig. Hey. Good morning, Steve. Just a follow-up question on the financing shortfall, $3.6 billion. Are you guys able to tell us, like, what timeframe that is, that shortfall occurs? Is that, like, late 2022 or late 2023? Like, when do you consider the absolute low in terms of your cash flow requirements? Okay. Luke, you want to handle that? Yep. Sure. At the moment, we have liquidity that takes us through, that takes us into Q3 of 2022 next year. Obviously post that, absent any other sort of corrective measures, the funding gap would start to build up, you know, beginning in Q3 2022. That the sort of critical funding gap period, Craig, is as that funding gap sort of builds up to the $3.6 billion during that 2022-2024 period. Okay. In terms of, I guess the, you know, the cost overruns, the $1.2 billion, any way you can kind of break it down roughly in terms of what was attributed to the open pit and what was attributed to the delay to the underground? Again, Craig, for Q3, the majority of the increase was really related to the delay to first sustainable production and, you know, that was caused by the delay to the undercut. In Q2, we had some adjustments for things like resequencing of the open pit and obviously pricing assumptions. The main change in Q3 is really the impact of the six-month delay to the undercut and the impact of that on sustainable production. Okay. Maybe just the last question for me- Hey, Craig. Sorry. Sorry, Craig, to interrupt. I'm not sure if you mentioned costs, but there is no. I mean, the only cost increase, I just want to make sure. Maybe I misunderstood, but there's no cost increase. The cost increase, there's one related to the COVID, but really what it is, it's a shift in the revenue and the production. That's what we're talking about when we talk about the $1.2 billion increase in the funding. It's mostly related to revenue. Yeah. Revenue, a shift in the revenue. Maybe I was not. I missed something. No, no. Fair enough. Fair enough. Good point. Maybe lastly for me, I mean, I guess a couple of months back, there's an article in the media talking about pretty specific numbers around some of the concessions that yourselves and Rio Tinto are willing to offer the Mongolian government, and they quoted a number of $350 million of additional revenue over the next three years, in addition to existing royalties and taxes. I was just wondering, does the $3.6 billion financing shortfall account for any concession to the Mongolian government? Or should we think of that as something on top of that number? Yeah. I will end on that. No, it doesn't include that. The reason, Craig, is that these, we're in negotiation. There's a lot of detail to go through. The final outcome of the negotiation is not known yet. I would say, nothing has been included in the current funding that we communicated. Okay. Thanks, guys. Okay. Thank you, Craig. Your next question comes from Ralph Profiti, Eight Capital. Please go ahead. Good morning, Ralph. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions, Steve. The first one is on. You know, I'm wondering what the significance is of the $5.3 billion, which is the original feasibility study from 2016 CapEx, right? Yeah. That is a number that we're gonna be reaching very, very soon, and is the only thing that's actually been approved by all parties in the OT LLC. Is there anything that prevents, you know, OT from continuing to spend their budget, say, in 2022 without, you know, the approval of the incremental budget from the government of Mongolia? No, it's a good point, Ralph, because the $5.3 is pretty much committed at the moment, and we cannot spend more than that. Okay. That's very important. We need to understand that this is a very, very large project. This is a project that is extremely complex. Okay. What we need to do, we need to move that project with the support of all shareholders. We cannot run this project, Ralph, from a month-to-month basis because you have long term. In order to make it efficient, you need to have long-term commitment. What we're reaching right now, we're reaching the end of the budget. Definitely what needs to happen now is we need to have the additional investment of the $1.4 billion, the one that we talked in the Definitive Estimate. Okay, the additional investment required to complete the underground mine. We need to do that with all shareholders, including the EOT or the government and Rio Tinto and TRQ, okay? That's very important. The reason why is that we need to proceed with the undercut. We need to resolve the regulatory approval. We need also to get support for the discussion for financing. There's a lot of things that must be done, and we cannot continue managing on a monthly basis or neither to go above budget. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Okay, my second question is on something you talked about in your commentary, Steve, about, and it was in the previous question about, you know, this debt forgiveness and the accelerated returns to the government of Mongolia. Within that proposal that you just presented, can you maybe outline what is the process for review and when are you hoping to get some type of an answer? Okay. As I said, I mean, like I said, Ralph, I've been in Mongolia for six weeks. I came back for that, for the quarter end and debt review here. This Friday, I'm going back. I was quite encouraged by the tone of the discussion with the government, and also, more importantly, the commitments that everyone is having, okay, and having right now. There's a lot of discussion. Even this week I was involved in discussion. What's important, Ralph, is that we all have a common objective here. The objective is really to make sure that the underground, and that's shared by TRQ, Rio Tinto, and also the government of Mongolia, okay? It's the objective or continuation of the underground development, the commencement of the undercut, and the sustainable production. We're committed there. In terms of proposal, I mean, the proposal from our point of view really addressed the key concern that the government had, okay? Which were mostly around the debt and when they would get dividend. But it always change. Ralph, you well know it, negotiation is not finished until it's finished. We're still having discussion on the terms and different elements on that one. I cannot commit, I cannot give you the detail, but what I can tell you is that we are, and also the government, we're all focusing to move forward and we are working very hard to make it happen. Great. Understood. Thank you, Steve. Okay. Thanks, Ralph. Your next question comes from Dalton Baretto, Canaccord. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good morning, Dalton. Good morning, Steve and team. Most of my questions have been answered, but I'm hoping I can follow up on a couple of Ralph's questions there. So first of all, just on the $5.3 billion versus the $6.75 billion, is there an option at all to maybe approve a small portion of the increase so you don't have to go tools down on November 30th? Yeah. It is a good question, Dalton, but like I say, I mean, yes, that's a possibility. Okay? We could do that, and the government and the company could decide that for in order to continue and on the discussion, on the negotiation to do that. Yes, that's an option. However, it's not something that we can do on a perpetual basis, okay? It's, Dalton, it's like building your house and you're just approving a weekly budget. You would have problem to eventually coordinate all the activities. In other words, yes, it can be done, but it's not the best and favorable solution. What we're looking eventually is to really get a support for the entire budget and be able to move with the undercut as well. Understood. Then just maybe in terms of what you have disclosed around the negotiations, you know, Ralph mentioned the debt reduction, and then there's also some talk around accelerated returns. On the debt reduction, with the 2016 agreement, part of that was knocking down the shareholder loans from $7 billion- $2.8 billion. Are we talking kind of the same order of magnitude here? Dalton, I'm not commenting on negotiation. I'll be able to tell you in a couple of weeks, and I'll give you all the detail there. In the meantime, things are changing, things are going, so I'm not commenting on the detail. Okay? Okay, that's understandable. Maybe I'll move on then. This consultant's report that you guys are reviewing, how much of a role does the resolution of some of these inconsistencies that were identified play in terms of the government actually agreeing to a deal? I mean, it's really at the OT board. It is something that needs to be resolved, I admit. Without going into the detail, this is something that is being handled by the OT board, and that's up to the board to decide on the details there. Okay. Just maybe one last one. I'll ask you the same thing I asked you last time. If you do come to a deal with the negotiating committee, does that proposal have to be ratified by parliament? I'll have the same answer as I did last time, Dalton. I think that I'll leave that to the government exactly how they want to do that. I would say that that's a possibility that they will do that. I'm sure that if they do, they will, they're confident that the process will be quite fast. I cannot comment on how they will do it. Okay. Thanks, Steve. That's all for me. Good luck. Thank you very much. Very appreciated. Your next question comes from Orest Wowkodaw, Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Oh, thanks for taking my follow-up. Just following up again on Dalton Yes, I'm good. Yeah. Thank you. But just following on the line of questions that Dalton and Ralph were asking you. Like from an outsider perspective, it feels like there's little progress in terms of these negotiations with the government to deal with the non-technical criteria here. You know, what I'm trying to get a better understanding of, I mean, how long can this limbo continue before Rio Tinto and Turquoise Hill decide that you can't keep the project in this holding pattern and we need to do a tools down type of statement like we saw in 2015? Like, is that a real possibility? Okay. Two things, Orest. You mentioned little progress. I would say that I hope my message is clear that there is definitely a strong commitment and also a lot of work that is being done at the moment. If I take the government is very generous with its time, they're taking a lot of time on that. They have different committees. This is a difficult negotiation and, Orest, you would definitely agree with me on that one. It's I would not say little progress. It is I mean, it's an intense negotiation at the moment, okay? How long can we stand that process? I mean, my answer is it cannot be clearer than that. We are at the inflection point here, okay? This is the time where we committed the money that we had approved or was approved. We cannot continue that project. I would say a decision, unless there's a partial or full budget uplift, we cannot continue managing that budget like that. We don't have; we won't have the money. A decision needs to be made, and it needs to be made now, okay? That's where we're at the point where we need to make a decision and move on. If there is no Sorry, Orest. I was not clear. What we need to do, we need to have an agreement, not a decision. We need to have an agreement and we're working extremely hard to make it happen. That's what I wanted to say exactly. Okay. Has there been any agreement on any of the major issues so far that you can comment on? I cannot comment on that. Is it all or nothing type of agreement? You, Orest, you know that in negotiation, you start at different points, you agree on points, you go further, you come back. I cannot comment until it's finished. Okay. Just, Steve, just to clarify what you're saying. Like you say you're at an inflection point here. Does that imply that if there's no agreement, you know, in any kind of timely manner, that we could see a tools down type event ahead, or am I misinterpreting what you're saying? No, I would say that if we cannot reach an agreement in the near future, we will need to consider a very unattractive option. That includes the risk of having to start to suspend some work because we won't have the budget always. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate the colors, Steve. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Your next question comes from Jackie Przybylowski, BMO. Please go ahead. Thank you. I try not to- Jackie. Hi. Beat a dead horse here, but I think Dalton raised a good point about whether this needs to be ratified in parliament. To go back to your response to Orest that you'd need to see an agreement fairly soon in order to keep progress on construction, what do you define an agreement as? If the Mongolian government decided this did need to be ratified by parliament, would you need that whole process to be finished before you've considered that you've reached an agreement? No, I mean, it's. Yeah, how do I answer that, Jackie? There are definitely key points that needs to be resolved, okay? We need to agree to proceed with the additional investment of $1.4 billion, okay? That's all. Going from that $5.4 billion - $6.7 billion, I think that we talked before. There's a decision to be made on that one so the project team can start to commit the money. We need also to have support financing because we'll need money and so that's pretty clear. There's still some regulatory approval that needs to be done, okay? It all depends. I mean, it's we want. We are in that situation right now. We need to. There's a pressing moment to make it happen, okay? Definitely, I'm hoping that the government will be in a position to approve quickly. Now, Jackie, well, depending on circumstances will adjust, but the uplift of the investment of the additional investment is a key to be able to move the support. The element I mentioned are very important that we see the government moving on those things. Like I say, I hope that they're gonna be able to approve quickly. I mean, that's a formal legally binding approval, not an informal handshake sort of approval. Is that right? That's what we want. There's always shades of gray in this, in these things. I think that one will get there. We'll have to evaluate it. Definitely a formal agreement. Because the key point here, we want to be able to make that investment and start and have the regulatory. The elements are there. We need those one, okay, to be able to move. If a question of ratification or approval, I mean, it will depend what form and what, where we stand at that time. Definitely what we want is assurance that we can move safely with that project when we make the additional investment. Okay. Thanks, Steve. Okay. Thanks, Jackie. Your next question comes from Richard Hatch, Berenberg. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks very much. Thanks for taking my questions. Mm-hmm. Yeah, good morning. I just wonder, I've got a couple of questions. The first one, I wonder if you may be able to give us any kind of order of magnitude on the impact of the medium-term production profile based on kind of the previous technical report that we've got to kind of work with, just off the back of these delays, or whether you were unable to give us that. Just on that, you know, as you're kind of bringing those next panels into production into the medium term, Jo-Anne, how comfortable are you with the geotech? Are you happy that you're not gonna have to make any more kind of mine plan revisions with regards to support? Secondly, and I'm sorry, I am flogging the dead horse on this one, but just so I can get it right in my own head, it is the kind of very basic order of play, you agree fiscal terms or, you agree a budgetary with the various stakeholders in the project. You can then take that to the board of OT LLC, that gets approved, and then you can kind of take the project forward, and we can kind of progress from there. Is that the kind of basic way that you are looking at it? Get the agreement signed and agreed with the government, then agree on OT LLC level and then, kind of, you know, develop the undercut. Thanks. Yeah. Richard, I'll answer the second one, and Joanne will do first. On definitely the increase in the investment of $1.4 that we need at the moment is definitely a new LLC approval. That's where it is. The OT directors need support or directions from the government, so you can understand what would happen there in this case. That's the way it would happen. Joanne, you want to answer the production? Yes. No problem, Steve. Thank you, Richard, for the question. Just in terms of the impact on the ramp up. We would, so, you know, you'd be familiar that in the technical report in chapter 16, there's a production profile. We would see, you know, the disclosure is announcing an alteration to that profile, ramping up to the 95,000 tons a day post Panel 0 ramp up. We're seeing that overall ramp up is taking longer in the order of the delay to those, to the commencement of those panels. Now, there's ongoing work in this, and so, you know, it is something that, as we understand the situation more as, Shaft 3 and Shaft 4 progress, you know, there will be, you know, a better understanding of where we're heading, to, you know, to a better degree. That's probably, you know, the best I can provide at the moment. There will be ongoing optimization efforts to try to do more with the same ventilation constraints. We'll provide any updates we can as they materialize. In terms of geotech and further revisions with respect to support, I don't know that support is where we would see major revisions. Certainly we've continued to drill and collect more ore body knowledge, as is appropriate with a project of this size. The drilling in Panel 2 North is complete, and it's showing overall less structure than we saw in Panel 0. But this is still a deep cave, and we need to try to minimize risk as we head into production. There are mine design refinements that are going on, as noted in the MD&A. That work we'll advise of any material updates to that as they crystallize. We do expect some mine design refinements, but it's all about minimizing risk as we head into production and into the ramp up. Hopefully that's useful, Richard. Very helpful. Thank you very much for your time. Thanks, Richard. Ladies and gentlemen, as there are no further questions on the phone lines, we will conclude today's conference call. We thank you all for participating and ask that you please disconnect your lines. Have a wonderful day.