Barrick Mining (B.US) Q2 conference call: The agreement with Newman Mining is worth $4 billion and will accelerate the IPO of North American pure gold companies

The Zhitong Finance App learned that global gold mining leader Barrick Mining (B.US) announced its latest results before the US stock market on Monday. The company also announced that it had reached an important agreement on a large joint venture between the two parties in Nevada, USA, and another mining giant Newman Mining (NEM.US), thus paving the way for the Canadian company to accelerate the listing of its North American mining assets on the New York stock market.

Under an agreement announced Monday, Newman Mining will pay Barrick Mining $1.95 billion, while the two companies will inject assets not previously included in the joint venture, including Barrick Minings' Fourmile project and Newman Minings' large-scale Fiberline and Mike gold development projects.

At the analyst conference call that followed, its executives provided additional information on the agreement.

The following is the Chinese translation of the minutes of the Barrick Mine earnings conference call for the second quarter of 2026:

Executive speeches

Mark Hill (Mark Hill)

Group Chief Operating Officer, President, CEO and Director

Before we share our full quarterly results, I'd like to talk about the agreement we announced today with Newman Mining. Actually, I'd like to clear up some misunderstandings. First, the total value of the programme is about $4 billion. Obviously, this includes the corresponding share of the Fourmile project, but it also includes contributions from Newman Minings' Mike and Fiberline assets — I think this part is around 6.4 million ounces. Also included are the costs of resolving historical disputes and lawsuits between joint venture partners. At the same time, it has also reduced the frictional costs of the planned IPO, which will unlock more value for shareholders than the cash benefits of the transaction. As we said, most of these earnings will go back to shareholders.

Next, we reached this agreement after 4 months of negotiations. This allows us to now focus on creating value through the safe and stable production of gold. It is critical that our interests with our joint venture partners are now fully aligned. I really want to thank my colleagues at Newman Mining, Natascha and our team, and of course everyone on the Barrick team, for the tremendous efforts they have made to reach this agreement over the past 4 months.

Before we get into the results discussion, there are a few other things I would like to highlight. I think these are the key strengths that Barrick has shown over the past nine months. First, it's our leadership team. Over the past 10 months, we've improved the operational performance of our entire business. This is due to the strength of our operating site team, from the general manager to every employee on the mining front line. Second, as we said earlier, we have strengthened our relationship with Newman Mining, laying a good foundation for us to further develop and expand NGM (Nevada Gold Mining, a joint venture subsidiary of the two parties), which is also critical.

Second, through the IPO, we are building the only major American pure gold company with high-quality, long-life assets. This is exactly what investors — including some of the world's fastest-growing sources of capital — are looking for. Third, outside of North America, our Rest of World (Rest of World) asset portfolio is growing significantly, and we have unique advantages in working with our Chinese partners, including joint ownership and co-investment of mines. This allows us to increase efficiency and strengthen our supply chain, help us control costs, and improve results and reduce risk through partnerships. With that background, let me talk about this quarter's results.

As I said, we've had excellent operational and financial results for the third straight quarter. We have achieved all 4 of the priorities we set at the beginning of the year. We continue to improve our safety performance, and I'll come back to that later, but clearly there's still a lot of work to be done in this area. Our gold production was above the guidance target and the cost guidance target was met. We have advanced growth projects — Fourmile, Lumwana, and PV expansions — all on time and on budget. You seldom hear that in the mining industry.

We continue to review the Reko Diq project and began slowing down development progress on July 1, as previously disclosed. Our performance in meeting production standards and cost standards also gave us strong financial results, which Helen will discuss in detail later. Finally, we have reached a major milestone in preparations for the North American gold asset IPO, which is expected to be completed before the end of the year.

Next, let's talk about safety, which remains our top priority, and our goal is for everyone to return home safe and healthy every day. We saw a month-on-month decline in the accident frequency rate, from 0.92 to 0.77. But it's disappointing that we still have 6 lost hours accidents (LTI). So there's still a lot of work to be done. This is totally unacceptable, and we must focus on safety until we reach the goal of zero harm. All of our leaders, right down to the executive board, myself included, are spending more time deep into the site and the mine. They are verifying more critical controls and eliminating more risk in the field.

In addition to that, we've invested more than $90 million in technology to improve safety this year. This includes automation of mining equipment, as well as on-board dashcams, safety reporting software, and AI analysis. We are also working to eliminate safety hazards as much as possible through engineering design. Next, check out the highlights of the second quarter. Actually, before I start talking about the highlights of the second quarter, there's one more thing I'd like to clarify, and that is our profit situation. Adjusted earnings per share of $0.82 were in line with consensus expectations. I know there were some media reports this morning saying we fell short of expectations, but I'm not sure what their source of information is.

Barrick produced 796,000 ounces of gold this quarter, 3% above the guidance target, and up 11% from the first quarter. The main drivers were: we advanced Loulo-Gounkoto's production increase plan ahead of schedule; PV increased production faster than expected after maintenance and shutdown in the first quarter; we set a record for underground mining tonnage at Cortez and continued to increase Goldrush's production. In terms of copper, we have produced 56,000 tons. We have controlled our costs very well, and the cost of gold is within the guidelines. Our earnings almost doubled year over year, and quarterly shareholder returns more than doubled to reach $1.5 billion. Strong performance in the second quarter clearly spanned all of our regions.

North America continues to support our world-class asset portfolio. Both NGM and PV achieved year-over-year revenue growth. Together, the two account for 53% of our total adjusted EBITDA, and the profit margin was 61%. Other regions also contributed to strong gold production, and the attribution-adjusted EBITDA margin reached 59%. The copper business continued to perform well, with profit margins comparable to the gold business. Next, let's talk about growth. As I said, our growth program progressed according to plan this quarter. Fourmile, for its part, has increased drilling activity to 20 rigs and plans to complete a pre-feasibility study (PFS) by the end of 2028. For Lumwana, we have made good progress in expanding our mill, which will double copper production. We expect the 2026 capital expenditure for the project to be at the low end of the guidance range, and the project remains within budget. We expect to produce the first batch of copper after the expansion at the end of the first quarter of 2028. PV expansion is also progressing according to plan. We have made progress in licensing and construction of tailings facilities, transportation roads, and water treatment plants. We are also pleased to report that 90 per cent of resettlement programs have now been accepted.

We are continuing to review the Reko Diq project as previously disclosed and have decided not to start plant construction this year. As a result, we lowered our 2026 projected capital expenditure from $600 million to $700 million to $450 million to $500 million. The reduction in expenditure at the Reko Diq mine lowered our 2026 guidance target for the Group's total vested capital expenditure to $3.8 billion to $4.2 billion. Back to IPOs for North American assets. As I said, this entity will be a high quality pure gold company with all of its assets located in a low-risk jurisdiction. I'm happy to tell you that the board of directors has selected me as CEO after the new company is formed. We have completed all operating and separation agreements between Barrick and the new company, and are expected to complete the IPO before the end of the year. We anticipate that the vast majority of net proceeds raised will be returned to shareholders. I know quite a few people have asked me this question in the past.

I will now leave the floor to our Chief Financial Officer Hongyu Cai (Hongyu Cai), who will review our financial performance.

Hongyu Cai (Hongyu Cai)

Senior Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Non-Independent Director

Thanks Mark and good morning everyone. The second quarter was our third consecutive quarter of strong production, cost control, and financial results. Net profit was $1.2 billion, up 50% year over year. Adjusted net profit of $1.36 billion, equivalent to adjusted earnings per share of $0.82, is in line with Bloomberg consensus expectations. The attribution-adjusted EBITDA was $2.5 billion, up 51% year over year, and the profit margin was 59%.

In terms of cash flow, the second quarter is usually the quarter with our lowest free cash flow due to the annual schedule of tax and interest payments. We also made a $400 million one-time payment related to Loulo-Gounkoto this quarter. The combination of these two factors led to a 33% year-over-year decline in attributable free cash flow. Excluding this factor, attributable free cash flow will increase by more than 60% year over year this quarter. Since the beginning of the year, attributable free cash flow has reached US$1.4 billion, more than double that of the same period last year.

On the operational side, gold production increased 11% month-on-month, exceeding the guiding target. We continue to operate within cost guidance, reflecting our strong focus on operational efficiency to offset the pressure of rising fuel prices. At the end of the second quarter, we had a healthy net cash of $1.2 billion on our balance sheet, which gave us the flexibility to continue to invest in the highest return opportunities and return capital to shareholders.

Next, let's talk about our capital allocation framework. We have 3 priorities: first, prudently managing our balance sheet; second, investing in our assets to drive profitable growth; and third, returning capital to shareholders. Our framework aims to achieve sustainability across cycles. On the balance sheet side, we had sufficient liquidity at the end of the quarter, including an undrawn revolving credit line of $3 billion, and no significant maturing debt until 2033. In terms of asset portfolios, Lumwana and Fourmile are two clear examples, and we're strategically deploying capital into endogenous growth opportunities that we believe will generate excellent returns.

More broadly, we intend to identify similar profitable growth opportunities to reinforce our growth momentum while maintaining discipline in how and when capital is deployed. It's not about growing for growth; it's about creating value over time through a portfolio of assets with extraordinary growth potential. Finally, we are implementing a return on capital policy. Our dividend policy stipulates a basic quarterly dividend of $0.175 per share, and additional dividends based on performance at the end of the year. The goal is for a total dividend ratio of 50% of attributable free cash flow. This quarter, we also completed a $1.2 billion share repurchase under the $3 billion mandate announced last quarter.

In the three quarters since the new leadership took office in October 2025, Barrick has returned $3 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases, more than double the same period last year. We believe that careful execution of capital allocation strategies will further drive shareholder returns. In short, our capital allocation framework is disciplined, flexible, and designed to function throughout the entire cycle. It supports reinvestment in the business, drives growth, protects balance sheets, and creates a clear path to returning excess cash to shareholders.

Now I'll return the phone to Mark.

Mark Hill

OK, thank you, Hongyu. Regarding guidance targets, our 2026 production and cost guidance remains unchanged. In the third quarter, we expect gold production to be higher than in the second quarter, in line with the plan, and production will be higher in the fourth quarter. Copper production in the second half of the year should also increase compared to the first half of the year. Since October 2025, we have continued to meet our strategic priorities and set new standards for operational performance. Congratulations once again to our general manager and staff on site. We continue to focus on controlling costs, capital intensity, and productivity. Based on what we're seeing so far, we're still confident we can deliver on our 2026 full-year commitment.

Finally, a few more things. Obviously, I want to end with the most important thing — safety. As I said, while we've seen significant improvements, everyone is still focused on making sure every employee gets home safely every day. We have improved operational stability and once again achieved our guiding goals. As mentioned, all of our projects are progressing on time and on budget, and once again, I'm not sure how many times we can do this in the mining industry. We have also advanced our North American IPO. Overall, we are implementing essentially all 4 of the priorities we set at the beginning of the year. Of course, we also changed our relationship with Newman Mining, which enabled us to gain full value and expand NGM.

Analyst Q&A Summary

Josh Wolfson of RBC

Joshua Wolfson: Thank you so much. Thanks Mark for the introductory comment and some numbers provided. I was wondering if you could break down the different values of each component of the agreement in more detail. For example, out of this $1.95 billion, how much are Mike and Fiberline worth? What is the amount of the adjustment to resolve the previous dispute then?

MARK HILL: Okay. First, let me be clear, I'm not going to segment. Regarding the previous controversy, I can't give specific figures. We need to go through a process to arrive at that number. So we can only talk about this step so far. As for structural changes, now that we have reached this agreement, we will actually begin to optimize the structure of the IPO. As you can imagine, this is a work in progress. But as I emphasized, the total value on the table at the end of this discussion was about $4 billion.

One more thing, Josh. I want to emphasize that since I started in this role, I've found plenty of opportunities at NGM. You know these assets very well, and I'm sure you agree with that. There has been no increase in processing capacity there for many years. We are facing a 25-year old infrastructure. Then world-class assets like Fourmile came along. The answer is that we're just processing it through our existing infrastructure and putting off other ounces — anywhere else in the world, if you find that many ounces, you'll want to get it into production as soon as possible.

So I've been discussing with Natascha and Newman Mining from the beginning how we can work together to optimize NGM. Speaking of optimization, I would like to consider increasing processing capacity. I want to stop transporting ore over long distances throughout the state. The only way to do that is to combine all of these assets now and work together to see if we can justify building a roaster or autoclave and what infrastructure we need to build at Cortez to process Fourmile and Goldrush ores, establish our cost structure, and increase our total production. The situation we have now reached, at least in my opinion, allows us to quickly add significant value without getting involved in disputes over resource allocation.

Obviously, Josh, there will also be a lot of synergy because we'll be using the same team, putting everything together, and using the same equipment, we can move faster. This is clearly my ultimate goal.

Joshua Wolfson: Okay. Just a follow-up question. With the completion of this resolution, is the company considering a different plan for the IPO structure from the 10% to 15% minority ownership previously reviewed? Would you guys consider a larger ratio? If the company considers a larger ratio, under what circumstances is a shareholder vote required?

MARK HILL: Josh, it's still going to be 10%. Given the way the company is structured, I don't see any changes. Does anyone correct me?

Jorge Palmes: Sorry, I'm Jorge. Exactly. I think it's just a matter of looking at the structure we were studying at the beginning and comparing it to the current structure because, as Mark said, there is a frictional cost. You also need to consider factors such as where they are registered. So now that we've reached an agreement with Newman Mining, we need to go back and revisit all of these things. Again, as Mark said, this is where the value lies. We have this flexibility and choice.

Tanya Jakusconek (Scotiabank):

Tanya Jakusconek: I have a few questions. The first one is back to Josh's question. Mark, should we understand it this way: $4 billion is Newman Mining's assets plus dispute resolution costs, plus $2 billion in additional funds, for a total of $6 billion? Is this the payment price I should understand?

MARK HILL: No, Tanya, that's a total of $4 billion.

Tanya Jakusconek: Okay. So should I understand this as cash payments from Newman Mining? Will this be part of the IPO's cash inflow? Or will this $2 billion in cash likely be used for share buybacks and/or additional dividends at the end of 2026?

One last question, Mark, about some of the IPO process. You mentioned that the separation agreement was completed. I think all of the documentation has been submitted to the SEC, including the technical report. What are we waiting for? Just waiting for the SEC to approve the submission of 3.5-year financial statements to complete the formation of a new board of directors? Maybe talk about the processes we need to go through to actually implement it.

Jorge Palmes: I'd say we're actually pretty close. But like I said, now that we have this agreement with Newman Mining and got their approval, one of the things we need to do is go back and look at our previous structure and compare it to what we have today. We just wanted to do this to ensure due diligence and understand the impact because we think there's a lot of room for savings there. This is where we are right now.

Lawson Winder of Bank of America Securities

Lawson Winder: There are a few questions. Regarding Fourmile, I noticed that PFS is still scheduled to be completed in 2028. But now that it's injected with NGM, is there any chance of speeding up development and possibly putting the asset into production earlier than the early 2030s as initially indicated by PEA? This is my first question.

MARK HILL: Okay, thanks Lawson. Obviously my intention is to move forward as fast as possible. Now that we've basically completed this process, I think it will definitely speed us up. Currently, we are still limited by factors such as approval timelines. But I think where we can really make progress is on the processing side, right? I've talked to Natascha because I'm going to move forward with this work. We will be working on all of this in parallel. That's why we're advancing those ramps and drilling. So it probably won't start production sooner, but hopefully when it is put into production, we can reach production faster and reach higher production targets. That would be our goal.

Lawson Winder: Okay, very helpful. Then maybe I can skip to the issue of IPOs. After the initial minority divestment, I mean have you changed your mind about next steps until now? I remember you said before that this was just an initial minority equity IPO, that's all. Are there any current considerations for finalizing 100% of BNA's IPO?

MARK HILL: No, Lawson, not currently. I mean, we're still doing our 10% IPO as planned, just to demonstrate value and highlight the value of a dedicated management team. Incidentally, we've basically split the management team, and I hope you've noticed changes in production and safety, and this is due to this focus. Anyway, to answer your question, no, we don't have a renewal plan that says it's going to be more than 10%.

Lawson Winder: Okay, very helpful. So in terms of process, will a marketing process be launched in the near future?

Mark Hill: Yes, but I don't know the exact schedule, George, do you know?

George Joannou (Chief Development Officer): Well, we'll have to go back and take a look, but there will definitely be a marketing process.

Anita Soni of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)

Anita Soni: My first question is about the capital you mentioned. I think you just talked about aging infrastructure. I wonder what the capital expenditure for a new roaster or similar facility would be like? What can we expect from NGM's future capital expenditure?

MARK HILL: That's a great question, Anita. Regarding the roaster, I wanted to re-optimize the entire process. You've been there a few times, so you've seen it in action. Regarding the roaster, we've actually made Hash do the research full time. I'd estimate it to be around $2.5 billion, but I'm not sure if that's the number. But this will offset a lot of things; you know, we'll be shipping materials all over the country, and it'll also reduce some other infrastructure requirements. As for other capital, will Wessel help me add, does NGM have any other major capital projects?

Wessel Hamman: That's basically it, Mark. Obviously, there is also the development of Fourmile, which we disclosed to the market. Conceptual PEA ranges from $1.5 billion to $1.7 billion, and we'll be investing in Fourmile over the next few years. Other than that, this is the main project in our capital portfolio. We plan to advance part of our capital expenditure this year to replace Turquoise Ridge's truck fleet. There are a few other projects, as well as the autonomous transportation project we are mentoring at Carlin. That depends on how successful we are with these projects. We still expect our capital expenditure to be in line with the guiding goals we set for North America a few years ago. Here are a few of the main projects.

Anita Soni: I'd also like to ask about FourMile's PEA. I know you guys are promoting PFS and are using different types of infrastructure structures. But this PEA—shouldn't it be submitted within 45 days of you announcing the PEA? I'm guessing this is probably one of the reasons why your share price fluctuates, because other than a few slides, we don't have a real reference to tell us how to model this project. So there is a big difference in how everyone models Fourmile. Can you submit the PEA that was released last year so we can have something to refer to at least until PFS comes out?

Mark Hill: Actually, Anita, this is a fair question, do you think that's why our stock price dropped 7%?

Anita Soni: Well, I mean, if everyone is arguing about what $2 billion actually is, and someone estimates a lower number — like you said on the conference call — it's because they aren't sure what Fourmile is worth.

Wessel Hamman: I mean when we submitted PEA, it was conceptual in nature and still technical.

MARK HILL: OK, Anita, you mean you're basically not getting enough information, right?

Anita Soni: Yes. So, I mean, yeah, there's a lot of unknown stuff like mining methods, unit costs, right? We didn't know about this NPI before, right? That's a major problem hidden inside, but no one knows. Anyways, that's all I said. I'd also like to ask about Fiberline.

MARK HILL: We'll take this back and see how we can do better. I understand what you're asking. I'll find a way and get back to you.

Anita Soni: Okay. Finally I'd like to try the question about Fiberline and Mike again. Can you give us some rough figures on how much value they would add? I'm assuming -- by calculation, Newman Mining paid for Fourmile, but they also exchanged -- you both paid each other for their 38.5% interest in Fourmile and Mike. So that's a net worth, I guess, they injected 61.5% of these specific assets into a total of $4 billion. Is that correct to understand?

MARK HILL: Yes. The correct understanding is that we paid for Mike and Fiberline's 61.5% equity and the settlement amount (which we certainly won't disclose). Listen, Anita, we agree to publish just one number, and it's quite impressive. So, sorry, I can't give you that breakdown data.

Anita Soni: Okay. Well, I think as the IPO approaches, people are trying to understand the value of Fourmile as an important component. So any extra info would be helpful.

Daniel Major of UBS

Daniel Major: Sorry, just wanted to clarify this $4 billion. To be clear, is this the total value of Fiberline and Mike's 61.5% plus Fourmile's 38.5% deal? Or is it just the Fourmile part?

MARK HILL: Sorry. So when you add everything up, you get the $4 billion figure, which includes the value of 38% of Fourmile equity. Then you have to subtract the value of Fiberline and Mike's 61.5% equity. Some of that money was also used to resolve some remaining disputes, so let's just say that. Also, if you want to understand the full value, Barrick obviously has some benefits by getting consent and reducing the frictional costs of an IPO. I might be overly complicated, Daniel, but...

Daniel Major: No, no, that's fine. Just trying to figure it out. OK, no problem. Then, you've already mentioned some of them. But if I look at PEA's high-level parameters for 2025:600,000 to 750,000 oz production, 1.5 billion to 1.7 billion US dollars in capital expenditure, and 650 to 700 US dollars in full maintenance costs (AISC). You mentioned that downstream processing may require an additional $2.5 billion in capital expenses, and production may still have room to increase. So, can the full cost of maintenance still be assumed to be equivalent to $650 to $700?

Wessel Hamman: Depending on where we put it, it might actually exceed it. Do you want to say something?

Unknown executive: The AISC rating issued as part of the conceptual PEA was naturally based on the consensus gold price at the time, which was around $2,500 or more. So if you apply today's analysts to the long-term consensus gold price of 3,600 US dollars/ounce, every 1,000 US dollars of gold price changes are about $100 sensitive. So the correct view is that we should add $100 to the range we posted earlier to take into account the fact that the price of gold has risen by $1,000 since then.

MARK HILL: Okay. Daniel, back to engineering. Obviously, the idea is to increase Nevada's overall production capacity, or reduce trucking. So yes, there will be more capital expenditure, but it will increase production and lower costs. That would be the goal.

Daniel Major: OK. Sorry, the route wasn't clear. So yes, $3,600, you add $100 to $650 to $700. Is that right, just be clear?

Unknown executive: Correct. Yes.

Daniel Major: Does that include the sensitivity of technical NPI?

Unknown executive: Correct. Includes all royalties, including NPI.

Daniel Major: OK, clear. And then one last question. If we look at the valuation of this stand-alone project, or in relation to the value implied by $4 billion and its various components, is there — or can you provide more details on whether Newman Mining benefited from any assumptions of its 38.5% share of infrastructure, which were factored into the value of today's deal? So, there is an offset involving the transfer of other materials from the processing plant. What's going on with this?

MARK HILL: Yes, the two technical teams have taken that into account. Incidentally, the two technical teams, one from Newman Mining and one from Barrick, sat down with the model and all the data, studied it over and over again, and all of this was taken into account when we came up with this number.

Daniel Major: OK. Maybe there's another question, if that's OK. Obviously, Mark, you'll be leading the IPO entity. Can you tell us how far the parent company's recruitment for senior management positions has progressed?

MARK HILL: Listen, we're moving this discussion forward to find the next leader for Barrick. We'll update it as soon as possible, and I'd say “soon” is an appropriate term. We'll update the market soon. It's an ongoing process, Daniel.

Bennett Moore of J.P. Morgan

Bennett Moore, I'd like to change the subject a little bit. I was wondering if you could discuss Loulo-Gounkoto's plans to increase production in more detail, particularly with regard to advancing open pit mining, what kind of capital expenditure is required and the risk appetite for doing so?

George Joannou (Chief Development Officer): I think the best way to explain Loulo-Gounkoto's current situation is that, as we said, we've been very successful in increasing production. So it's now a self-sustaining project. Therefore, any capital and growth we are currently funding is self-sustaining. Our expected growth for next year will begin with Baboto's retreat and open pit mining, possibly in the early or mid-second quarter. So, I think this is the most I can say so far. We're still refining these plans. What is certain, however, is that we will begin open pit mining in the first half of next year.

Bennett Moore: Okay. So maybe it's about the overall production rhythm. I know Mark gave some comments about gold and copper in the second half of the year, but NGM and PV tend to be high-end, and LG is ahead. So how much of a conservative component do you think are included in the guiding goals at this stage?

MARK HILL: Well, I don't think it's necessarily conservative. But listen, as I said, we'll reach our guiding goals. I think, to provide some more information, Veladero has been out of production. I think it's been two weeks, but we had to evacuate people due to a weather incident, and I'm sure you've seen news from Chile and Argentina on social media. So this has had an impact on us. Porgera also stopped production for the opposite reason — the Waile Creek dam dried up, and we had to shut down the entire plant.

So while I'm still confident we can meet our guiding goals, and you're right, NGM is in good shape, but we've also experienced some other issues across our entire asset portfolio. Both of these issues are actually due to natural factors rather than operational issues. So, I still think the goal of mentoring is fine, but it's definitely not conservative.

Bennett Moore: Understood. So a quick question. I want to know what the NGM personnel turnover trend is this quarter, and is it still around 15%?

MARK HILL: Yes 14%. What we're actually concerned about — making Barrick, and NGM in particular, the employer of choice, right? Not long ago, everyone wanted to work at Barrick. So we're working on it. As I said, the NGM culture, no matter what some of the articles say, seems to me to have completely reversed, right? As you can see from the production performance and safety performance I mentioned, when you go there, the attitude of the staff is definitely better than before. But I'll get the actual numbers, and if you can write them down, Ben, we'll get back to you.

Bob Brackett, Bernstein Research

Bob Brackett: A broader question, maybe I'll follow up with NGM. The broader question is, if I imagine a business outside of North America, do you have any considerations in asset portfolio management? Will this slow down because of the IPO process?

MARK HILL: Sorry Bob, please explain again. What are you referring to?

Bob Brackett: So think about all of your assets, some of your assets outside of North America have lots of natural partners or owners. Will the North American IPO process take all of your attention, so as we enter the end of the year or the beginning of 2027, we shouldn't expect too much portfolio management for businesses outside of North America?

Mark Hill: Actually, Bob, the portfolio of assets in the rest of the world is actually one of our biggest growth points. We talk about NGM a lot, but in fact, at our recent board meeting, we dedicated a session to the growth potential of other parts of the world — you've probably seen what's going on with Lumwana, or even Kibali, and what we can do there. So the current plan is to develop the rest of the world, and that's the focus. Seb, if you want to add.

Unknown executive: I think you've said it all too well, Mark. I think the most important thing about the rest of the world is, first, we're looking at how best to optimize this asset portfolio, as Mark suggests, using partnerships we can leverage. Second, we have real inherent growth potential, particularly brownfield growth around most of our operating sites. We already have built-in infrastructure. Of course, this is probably the cheapest ounce you can add to your yield. Then, as you said, we also have a Lumwana expansion project.

MARK HILL: But Bob, I'm not sure how familiar you are with these assets, but there's huge potential around them, and we're trying to flesh it out and come up with a proper plan.

Bob Brackett: Very clear. Quick follow up on a question. In the agreement with Newman Mining, are there any contingent payments, for example, if a breakthrough is made in exploration? Or can we assume that it has little to do with future exploration success?

MARK HILL: No, it's over, Bob.

Steven Green by TD Cowen

Steven Green: I just wanted to follow up on how do you plan to optimize NGM and possibly speed up FourMile? I think Lawson and Anita have asked most of my questions, but maybe you can talk about the approval requirements and what is required?

MARK HILL: Regarding approval, obviously you need to get a license. That's the key reason why we have to straighten out this joint venture — I have to understand what we can do in terms of processing before starting the approval process. It is for this reason that I am working to speed up this process. It's probably not a bad time to get a license in Nevada either. So I can't give you a clear answer about approval times, etc.

But now that we've reached this agreement, we'll sit back and fully optimize Nevada's operations and ore flow. I know Newman Mining also supports increasing processing capacity. Steven, we always have the same discussions; we have to figure out whether it's an autoclave or a roaster, and where to put it. I don't have a clear answer to this yet, but that's what we need to accelerate starting tomorrow.

Steven Green: OK. Follow up on Fiberline and Mike's questions. I'm sure you said these assets are around 6.4 million ounces. Is that right? Are these inferred resource amounts?

MARK HILL: Actually, I don't know the detailed breakdown of this 6.4 million oz. I just watched it in the previous PPT. So I'll get back to you and tell you, Steven.

Steven Green: OK. Where are those assets roughly? How developed are they?

Mark Hill: Fiberline is close to Turquoise Ridge's infrastructure. I think it's in pretty good shape. It is an open pit mine, so it is a satellite deposit. As for Mike, I don't value it very much at this stage, mainly because...

Martin Pradier of Veritas Investment Research

Martin Pradier: I wonder if you've considered floating 10% of your shares in assets outside of North America as well?

Mark Hill: Floating 10% of what?

Martin Pradier: 10% floating — basically, now you're going to have almost two companies, North America and the rest of the world, right? In the future, will you float 10% of your shares in assets outside of North America like you do now with an IPO for North American assets?

MARK HILL: Honestly, we haven't discussed this yet. It's never been mentioned. So it's definitely not on the agenda right now.

Martin Pradier: Okay. Second question, among other expenses, a $200 million fee is for Loulo-Gounkoto, if I understand correctly — you applied the 2023 law retroactively. Was this part of the original agreement? If so, why aren't previous quarters counted? Or is this a new development?

MARK HILL: OK, let me -- it's kind of a dynamic situation, and you can probably imagine it. But let me leave it up to Helen to explain.

Cai Hongyu: Thank you for your question. The nature of this expenditure is based on additional royalties, fines, and associated interest resulting from the retroactive application of the 2023 mining regulations, specifically for the 2024 and 2025 fiscal years. Previously, we had addressed all issues relating to 2023 and earlier, but this one is specific to 2024 and 2025. Regarding the amount of payments, we paid out $400 million in cash in April. Additionally, we received another $48 million payment request in July. Hope this answered your question.

Martin Pradier: No, I'm just curious why it wasn't included in the previous quarter; for example, it was part of the original agreement, aren't you prepared to calculate it?

MARK HILL: Yes, maybe you can answer that question.

George Joannou (Chief Development Officer): I think in simple terms, the original agreement only covered 2023. During that period of negotiations and disputes, we continued to follow our practices. We're still using our old practices. So this is actually — according to the agreement, it only applies retroactively to 2023, so we have to reconcile with the government for 2024 and 2025. This is actually that payment.

Lawson Winder of Bank of America Securities

Lawson Winder: First, you mentioned the amendments to the NGM Joint Venture Agreement. Can you provide more details on the extent to which this gave Newman Mining an additional voice in all aspects of its operations (including publishing technical reports, etc.)? Any details you can reveal would be very helpful.

MARK HILL: Well, I think there are a few things. First, as a general situation, this isn't actually in a joint venture agreement, but the way we handle this is completely different. Obviously, Newman Mining will be able to obtain any information and visit the site. We've done that with Francois and now David — their tech lead. They come over to provide any feedback and suggestions, which is always helpful. As for actual rights, the main thing is — Joe, please correct me if I'm wrong — we have to get their approval when we appoint NGM's general manager, and I personally have no objection to that at all. So I think that's fair.

The other part we agreed with, and I think it would be very helpful — now that we've re-established this relationship, and we actually want to move forward as soon as possible — that is that we're likely to embed a Newman Mining employee on NGM's executive team, and I think it would help. This is beneficial for things such as messaging, and they also feel more at ease about what is happening. So at a high level, this is the consensus we reached. There are also other matters relating to the Excluded Property Commission, etc. But in reality, since we've included projects like Fourmile in joint ventures, these issues have already been addressed. So it's probably not that relevant anymore.

Lawson Winder: Okay, very helpful. If I could ask one more follow-up question about the search for the CEO of Barrick Mining's parent company. Can you tell us if you prefer internal candidates or external candidates?

Mark Hill: Well, I personally always prefer internal candidates, but at this stage, we haven't come to a final conclusion. So there are both internal and external candidates. That's all I can say. My inclination is clearly an internal candidate.

Email question: In light of feedback from some shareholders, is the company considering splitting the North American business to existing shareholders rather than using an IPO? Nevada and PV's shares will be distributed to existing shareholders rather than diluting the existing shareholders' equity.

MARK HILL: A lot of people have asked this question. Simply put, no.