Good day and welcome to the Agnico Eagle Mines Limited’s Q3 2014 Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Sean Boyd. Please go ahead Mr. Boyd.

Thank you, operator and good morning everyone and thank you for joining our call this morning. We know it’s a busy day for everyone so we’ll move through the slides and then we’ll be happy to take the questions at the end. When we look at the quarter there certainly was some noise around the earnings. Some of that was due to our change from U.S. GAAP to IFRS which caused an increase in amortization. We actually had asset write-ups, we had higher tax expenses in the quarter. That was also related to the change, partly related to the change in accounting. We had increased exploration expense. That’s a good thing because of the discovery at Amaruq which we’ll talk a little bit about in the presentation. We had lower realized gold prices, by about 3% less than average. That was due to timing on sales. So that created some noise around the earnings. On the production side we had a tie-in in Finland on the expanded plant. We actually moved that about a month forward. That expansion was about six months ahead of the original schedule but that does set the production up to increase in Q4 and beyond. In LaRonde we had the hoist upgrade on the drive system. So that affected the production and cost there. But on balance when we look at the production number was almost 350,000 ounces, at costs where we expected them to be. In fact we saw good solid performance in Mexico, also very good performance in the Abitibi region at Goldex and Canadian Malartic. So a solid quarter and as a result of the solid quarter we see an upgrade in our production guidance for 2014 which is the second time we’ve done it this year. We’re now forecasting approximately 1.4…

Thank you. (Operator Instructions). Our first question comes from the line of Steven Walker at RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Great, thank you very much. Sean, you mentioned that the business is prepared to react to lower gold prices, or a structure that it can adjust the lower gold prices. Can you talk a little bit about what you could do and how you can modify, if we were in a -- call it broader gold range of $1,000 to $1,200 gold prices, kind of the [inaudible] where I think most companies seem to be adjusting the business line. Can you talk about how you [inaudible] and what you’re doing in a sharply lower gold price environment to adjust your business model?

Sure and most of that involves the decisions around capital allocation. Before we get to capital allocation, really on the revenue side we’re seeing a significant uptick in our revenue, perhaps in the change in the gold price just based on an estimated 15% increase in production, which is our guidance number which is not our budget number. So with an ability to maintain cost. So that’s number one. I think the Canadian dollar if we’re in a lower gold price environment has the potential to be lower. So it’s really the Canadian dollar gold price that gives us a bit of a natural hedge to help us withstand the lower gold price environment but the decisions on sort of sustainability we’ve been through this many times before in our career and in our history at Agnico and really it’s all about pace. And clearly the biggest capital projects would be the ones that would be most affected and that would be something like Meliadine. And so we do have the potential to adjust the pace at Meliadine. We’d be willing to adjust the pace at Meliadine. As we’ve said we’ve done that several times in our history, either at LaRonde or Goldex or you name it. But I think the interesting wrinkle in Nunavut now is Amaruq and for a relatively low capital compared to Meliadine we could still see an ability to maintain a production base up there and to generate free cash flow there. So I think that gives us some flexibility that we didn’t have a year ago. So that would be the approach but we’re still going through the budget process now and we continue to work on a number of ideas and initiatives for not just optimization but for a lower gold price environment.

If I may have a follow up, are there contingencies for carrying maintenance, is there a gold price level where you’ll have to consider carrying maintenance on the operations and do your operations allow you to effectively adjust cut off grades because of some of the underground mines may have more flexibility to do that or are you in a position where you can migrate and keep mines going longer at sharply lower gold prices?

Yeah, we wouldn’t have to high grade to keep mines going lower. You look at our cash cost they are in the 650 range. We expect to be around that range next year. So the mines would be generating cash. It’s a matter of reducing capital and so we don’t see us having to significantly alter any of the mine plans given the robust nature. If you actually look at the deposits in the mines, you’re going to see LaRonde go from sort of 200,000ish to sort of 350,000 over the next several years and have an ability to produce gold in the $650 range. You’re going to see Kittila go close to the 200,000 ounce range from roughly about 150,000 ounce range. You’ve got production in Mexico which is over 300,000 at a cash cost in the $550 range. Meadowbank has a short life but it can still generate good cash because the CapEx at Meadowbank is coming off substantially. So the assets are actually quite robust and we’re seeing increasing production without having to invest significant capital. As we said the only big capital number on horizon would be Meliadine and that still remains to be decided and that will be driven largely on the price of gold.

Again, a moving item there would be sustaining capital. At what levels do you think you could reduce the sustaining capital and continue to sort of operate the mines on the per ounce basis in sustaining capital and operating your mines on an ongoing basis?

Yeah, sustaining capital is in the $250 million range. So at a $1,000 gold we’re generating $350 an ounce let’s say on 1.6 million ounces next year. So we can cover that sustaining. We may have to tweak it a bit but we’re not having to cut significantly into sustaining.

Perfect, thanks very much guys. Most appreciated.

Our next question comes from the line of John Tumazos at John Tumazos Very Independent Research. Please go ahead.

Thank you for taking my question, I apologize if I haven’t comprehended the various details of your presentation. At LaRonde, Canadian Malartic, Kittila and Meadowbank, the cash cost were each considerably higher than the nine months. How much of that was influenced by IFRS accounting versus changes in grade versus changeovers, such as modifying the hoist at Kittila or LaRonde or tie-ins at Kittila and should we expect the cost to be similar levels next couple of quarters?

Yeah, I can deal with them one at a time and we dealt with some of this in the presentation. I think from LaRonde’s perspective we had the hoist drive upgrade. So production at LaRonde in the quarter was 37,000 ounces. We expected to be 55,000 to 60,000 ounces in Q4 and averaged that into 2015. As a result unit cost should go down. So at LaRonde the bump in cost is essentially due to the hoist upgrade and the required shutdown around the hoist upgrade. At Kittila we had -- it’s actually a good problem because we were actually six months ahead of schedule in terms of completing the expansion in infrastructure in the plant. We actually moved the tie-in in a month earlier. So it was originally in the fourth quarter, we moved it into the third quarter. So what we had there was about a 23% reduction in our tonnage in the quarter because of having the shutdowns to tie in the new components. As we said we expect production in the coming quarters to be sort of 45,000 ounces plus which would lower unit cost in Kittila. At Canadian Malartic the increase in the unit cost was largely the smelter return because if you look at the cost per tonne they were actually below the budget. So in those three mines from an accounting perspective, very little impact. It was really at the operational level and those are things that are one-time at least at LaRonde and Kittila, at Canadian Malartic it was really the NSR. At Meadowbank, we have been saying for many quarters that the second half just due to the mining sequence, not a change in the mining sequence but the actual mining sequence was going to see a two quarter lower grade cycle which is what we’re in right now. If you look at cost per tonne, cost per tonne was down to $74 Canadian. So we continue to get very good cost per tonne performance. We expect the Meadowbank production in 2015 to average a 100,000 to a 110,000 ounce per quarter so you should see the unit cost come down accordingly, so again no accounting impact.

Sean, there were two conference calls at 8:30 and two conference calls at 10 o’clock and going all the way until 2 PM and it’s hard for mining industries to digest things and this morning your stock is down US$2.65. Would you think the board would authorize a share buyback program in view of the considerable progress the company enjoys and the different variations in market conditions?

It’s not been discussed and in our 57 years our preference is to pay a dividend which we paid for 32 years rather than buy back shares. Would that be a topic at these types of levels, possibly we have a strategy session in December although we’ve not entertained that in the past. So at this point I can’t say yes or no but the balancing factor there would be what investments do we have internally at our projects. We’ve got several of them that have a high rate of return, particularly at Goldex with the satellite zones. We like Amaruq, it’s got a lot of upside potential good grades and good width, our preference would be to build our business but it’s a legitimate question but at this point that hasn’t been discussed.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of David Haughton at Bank of Montreal. Please go ahead.

Good morning Sean and team thank you for the update. Two ramp up kind of questions for you, Sean just looking at LaRonde, I presume all those hoisting issues that you encountered during the quarter are now behind you. You’re not expecting any other anything to creep up?

That’s correct.

Excellent and I think you had the costs obviously higher in that quarter because of the various issues that you had. Would you target unit costs of below a $100 per tonne going forward, is that your kind of target here?

Yes it is.

Very good and then just thinking about Kittila, you’ve now got the capacity to take it up to 4,000 tonnes per day do you have a timeline as to when you think you might reach that run rate and are all the pieces in place to be able to achieve that?

They’re in place in the plans for next year at say draw down of stockpile to get us there. We will require and have continued to accelerate the ramp development towards Rimpi. So it will still take a couple of years, one to two years to get up to roughly the 4000 tonne a day mining rate. So we’re still working through the budgets on that but next year we see the ability to produce 45,000 to 50,000 ounces per quarter with that additional capacity in the plant for next year largely on stockpile and in 2016 based on an increased mining rate. But there’s more development to do next year.

Okay so a mine constraint rather than mill constraint now? Have you at one stage you were thinking of possibly going beyond 4000 tonnes a day is that still part of your thought or you’re just happy with the current level?

No, that’s not part of the plan. The next piece of infrastructure that’s under consideration at Kittila would be a shaft. The team would like a shaft but the shaft is really driven by our capital allocation decisions. The deposits suggest that the shaft needs to be sunk there at some point. We feel that we have two to three years before that decision needs to be made and that’s really a decision around we expect to be in a position where we’ll be mining predominantly below 700 meters beyond 2020-21 and it’d be nice to have a shaft in place roughly at that time to keep our costs down. We could still mine with a ramp but the cost will be higher.

Okay, last question you said something that I'm hoping you might be able to explain your kind of thinking is you’re looking at how Amaruq could be tied in or linked with Meliadine. What do you mean by that, is that just the timing or logistics or what do you …?

Yeah there’s a number of ideas there that we’re working on and we’ll be in a position to talk more about that in detail in the February March timeframe.

Okay, so watch the space?

Yeah.

Okay thank you Sean.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Anita Soni from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Good morning guys. I have just a question on Malartic. Can you just clarify what the unit mining cost were I think in the Excel file was like 22 bucks a tonne and in the press release it said $19.60 per tonne, so I just wanted to know the correct one?

The operating cost, excluding royalty was at 20.40 or somewhere around that neighborhood for the quarter.

Would that be in Canadian dollars?

Correct. 19.60 without the royalties.

Without royalties and then what would be the 20.40 number?

We’re just looking at that. Yeah, we’re just looking we think that’s an error, 20.40 on the spread sheet.

Okay and maybe that is converted to -- thank you, thanks I’ll leave it there.

Okay, thank you.

(Operator Instructions). There are no further questions. Please continue.

Thank you everyone. Thank you operator and if there’s any other question feel free to give us a call. We would be happy to help you out. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the conference call for today. We thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect your line and have a great day.