Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. And welcome to the Gold Fields' Q2 Results. All participants are now in listen only mode. And there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after today's presentation. (Operator Instructions) Please also note that this conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to Nick Holland. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Dillon. And good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen or good morning depending on where you are in the world today. Thank you for joining us to discuss Gold Fields' result for the second quarter 2014. On the call with me today, Paul Schmidt, our Chief Financial Officer; Willie Jacobsz, our Head of Investor Relations. And Taryn Harmse, our General Counsel. I am please to report that our continued focus on improving execution and delivery at all mines within our portfolio as well as on better margins and generation of free cash flow has achieved appreciable success during the quarter. As we've previously shared with you, all activities undertaken in the Group are singularly focused on the objective of generating a sustainable free cash flow margin of at least 15% at $1,300 gold price. However, as we have also said previously this has to happen without compromising long-term sustainability of our ore bodies through a lack of investments in ore reserve development and stripping, or through high grading. Otherwise it will impact the integrity of our operations. During this quarter, Gold Fields exceeded the 15% target for the first time by achieving a free cash flow margin of 18% compared with 13% in the March quarter. To achieve this, the Group recorded an all-in sustaining cost of $1,050/oz and all-in costs of $1,093/oz from attributable gold production of 548,000 ounces. Compared with the same quarter a year ago, the Group's all-in sustaining cost improved by 26% from $1,416/oz down to $1,050/oz, and the all-in costs which includes everything improved by 30% from $1,572/oz to $1,093/oz, a fundamental change in our cost base as I am sure you'll agree. Over the same period, however, attributable production increased by 22% from 451,000 ounces to 548,000 ounces, reflecting the acquisition late last year…

(Operator Instructions) Our next question comes from Andrew Byrne of Barclays. Please go ahead.

Hi, good afternoon. Couple of quick questions if I may. The first one is just around St. Ives, with Neptune and then Invincible coming on, where are you expecting the grade to go to for 2015?

Yes. We haven't yet on our business plans for 2015, Andrew, but Neptune looks like it's around about 4 grams, but we will probably mine stage one by the end of the year, there’s four other stages, and we want to see the results of stage one before we carry on further. Neptune will start stripping -- no Neptune, Invincible will start stripping in quarter four, and we’ll probably get that into production, I would think around about the middle of next year, and the open pit grades look like they are some around 4 grams a tonne. So this could contribute 25% to 30% of the total mill feed. So it will definitely get the grade up, but I couldn't tell you at this stage what the grade is likely to be because in 2015, we will expect the mill contribution to come from Athena, Hamlet, Cave Rocks, and probably Invincible with a couple of peripheral open pits. So, it is going to be the weighted average of whatever they are.

Yes, sure, no worries. And I think with Neptune, it was duringPhase I maybe pausing and then coming back, as I remember from the site visit, just looking at Ghana, on Damang and Tarkwa, from a tonnage perspective, should we expect to see volumes closer to what we saw in Q1 for the next two quarters. I know we have the rainfall out there and then also the (inaudble) at Damang, is that the way to think about those two assets.

Yes, absolutely. Because the rain was particularly tough in the last quarter. And I would think that we should see an improvement from that perspective. We have given guidance for the year for Tarkwa in February and we should actually do quite a bit better than that. But I don't want to give definitive numbers yet. And Damang I think should also do better. The nine day shutdown of course hit us as well at Damang. So I think the big thing we are looking to do on Tarkwa is finish the CIL expansion by the end of the year which would give us 13 million tonnes of processing capacity, Andrew. And we will probably see the benefit of that into quarter one next year. And the other thing is at Damang we are focusing on making sure that we are maximizing the grade through to the plan by really focusing on dilution in the pits. And we are getting into some of the better grade stuff now deeper into Huni, and in the Saddle and Juno as well. So the grade should improve. So we are more focused at Damang on the grade than we are in the volume, because we are focusing on probably about 4 million to 4.2 million tonnes a year through the plant.

Yes, okay, great. And then just few last questions if I may. Looking at the kind of what you have done in Australia, do you kind of look at Iduapriem at all and think there is an opportunity there to consolidate that in with Tarkwa and Damang. Even just from a regional management perspective and potentially look at some synergies on that side, is that something that you’ve looked at and/or are there some obvious reasons why you (inaudible) actually that just doesn't work. And then just go on --

No. I will wait.

That's connected, so if you could just take that one.

Yes. Look, certainly Iduapriem is contiguous to Tarkwa, the Teberebie portion of Tarkwa is contiguous to Iduapriem. Now, it really depends on what AngloGold’s aspirations are. Given the fact that pulling back Obuasi and what they want to do in the country. So it would depend on first of all their strategic direction with regard to Ghana. And then whether or not a deal could be done on terms that make sense. But I think we would not be averse to the idea. We haven't got a good idea of all the synergies that might exist between the operations. I am sure that there are some. But if the opportunity arose I guess we would look at it.

Sure, sounds good. And then just very, very finally, I am just looking at your full year cost guidance, given that you have done all-in sustaining cost of of $1,058 in the first half, when we look at the second half and we say look, volumes in Tarkwa and Damang are likely to be at least in line if not somewhat better. Potentially some of the volume coming in from from Neptune plays out at 4Q, when we look at your cost guidance that seems to imply a second half cost of around $1,200 an ounce. Is that you just being cautious or is there something that we really need to just be vary of?

Andrew, it's Paul. Yes, we are just being cautious. And I think you’ll also need to understand, we’ve said that South people have tough third quarter based on the announcement we put up, but we are being cautious. But I want to bring down my all-in cost and guidance. If we beat it, we’re great, I am not going to -- we will see if we are right.

Our next question comes from David Horton from Bank of Montreal. Please go ahead.

Hi, Nick, thank you for the update. Can you just give us a bit of an idea for South Deep? Where are you at with these two new methodologies the 4x4 and the inclined slot? What's required for you to move beyond it just simply being on the drawing board to being implemented and what kind of timetable could you again imagine for that?

Sure, David. Now what we've done is we've identified two areas to run the pilots. And these are areas outside the current plant on the eastern side of mine which is in the more distill area. And we set aside these two areas. We are hoping to get these pilots mobilized in quarter four. We need our Geo Technique Review Board to sign off on final pilots and to design that and we probably run these pilots, I don't know maybe nine months or so and then see how they go. And if it works we will decide which method to adopt. Clearly, if we could move to the inclined slot method that would do away with the need for the conventional destressing that we are currently adopt. And will enable us to open up the ore body much faster than what we currently doing. So the only thing we need to there before we could implement any of these, we have to make sure that we have all of the sizes along the one kilometer strike all in the right position because when you change this mining method, you have to obviously change it across the entire mine. And we need to keep our geo technique sequence in shape and place. That will take a few months too. So realistically if it all works, I would say we are looking at beginning of 2016 to implement one of these two methods. The conceptual work is already been done. And the Geo Technical Review Board is very confident that these methods should work. But that said, the proof is in putting, we got to put this into action, run these pilots and see how we end up. So that is the best estimate I can give at this point in time. Obviously, if it works, David, then we will have to not only implement it, but we have to remodel the entire lot of mine and that will take some time too. But I think the best estimate is hopefully by the end of next year, we might be in a position to implement either one of these methods. They are mutually exclusive of course.

And each of those two methods, do they use similar kind of equipment? And I guess that the follow on from that is that if you select one or other how different is the equipment and the training compared to what you do now?

So, we don't need to use any different equipment. It would be the same equipment we are using. We would be using our conventional 282 drill rigs. And we will be using our long haul drill rigs. So no change there. The one benefit I comment about is we can get rid of low profile equipment. So in another words we can work with one suite of equipment that we already have. In terms of skills, this is bulk standard mechanizing mining. And whether you are drilling an inclined slot or whether you are drilling a destress phase, it is all the same principles. It is just a change in the overall mine design. So we don't see a major challenge in terms of equipments because we got the equipment. And the skills are common. Whether we mines we currently mine whether we change, we got to get skills upgraded that's common to all mines.

And given just sort of guestimating from the description that you have provided. It would seem that the inclined slot method might have a lower sustaining capital number to the 4x4 until existing one, is that a reasonable way to think about it? Because you are not doing the destress slot as a separate kind of exercise.

Exactly. First of all, it is one pass mining instead of three pass mining. We would need much less support because the slots would be a no entry areas, so they would be unsupported and the open stuff of course is a non entry area and you just blast that up. So we need a lot less mesh steel anchors, split sets, all of those kinds of things, so we'll save some money there and we'll save time. I think the biggest benefit here is you can actually get mining areas open up in six months as opposed to anything from 24 to 36 months with the current destress mining could, which really requires us David to have a whole grid open up of main access drive, taking the access drives coming through working out the footwall to make sure we can get the big fleet in. So it's going to save a lot of time. I think that's a biggest benefit here is the time that we will save.

Okay. Just switching now last operational question on, looking at Granny, in your slide that give a quite number of slides about the --they show where you are sitting and expectations but the quarter itself was surprisingly good grade. Is that just a spike in the grade profile or is it something that we should be thinking about a better grade going forward? How should we be thinking about Granny in a go forward situation?

Well, we said when we bought the asset that we thought the grade would improve as we get deeper. The other thing is we finding that we are getting positive reconciliations on the grade compared to the resource model. And that something we flag when we bought the mine. So that doesn't surprise us. The other thing we are doing is we are reducing our dilution. There has been a focus on reduced dilution. We probably chopped our dilution by 10% to 15% since -- if you look at the period since we bought it. But the other thing that's good and doesn't come through in heap grade but it comes through the yield is that we have improved our process plant recoveries by 5% from 87% to 92% simply by just changing the pipeline that we use, putting in smaller pipeline has given us better grant. And then also just changing pumping systems to get better water flow and more consistent flows. So that's given us 5% increase in recoveries which we think is sustainable. But I think get into the deeper parts of the mines, we will see the grade getting better and that's borne out by the expiration result. So I think this quarter is being particular good. I am not saying that you should marvel the grade that we are showing here going forward. But certainly we will be getting better grades we believe in the historical gratitude.

Okay. And last one probably more on accounting kind of question. With the sale of the assets, would you expect to record a profit or loss on the sale or is it close to breakeven?

Close to breakeven on both of -- the sale of Yanfolila, actually on Yanfolila we are going to receiving $4 million of payment we did last year. So a $4 million positive and Chucapaca, it is fairly much breakeven or small positive profit we are going to make.

In royalty stream

Yes, between run accounts for the royalties stream.

Royalty stream if you could value the royalty stream I think we will be in profit but --

Yes, account value of the stretch

Thanks very much, David. All right, we are going to try and Dillon give another one question -- another five minutes or so, what time we are now, we can probably do about another five to six minutes, maybe two more questions.

Thank you, sir. Our next and final question comes from Patrick Mann of Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.

Hi, afternoon guys. Just a follow up to the previous question. Have you got a sense of the tax implications on the sale of Chucapaca? And then I think just on the safety review when you announced the kind of the management impose one. You said that it was a new management team identifying kind of weaknesses in the system and that it could potentially -- that they could find other things or and you couldn't guarantee that they wouldn't. Have they finished that process of looking through the mine now? Are you more comfortable that they have to speed with, with everything that's going on and what the support structure across the entire mine look like? And just an update on that please. Thanks.

Yes. I think we are in a much better position, Patrick, compared to where we were six months ago. But I think we probably need the rest of the year to really make sure we understand all of the issues and areas. But I think slowly but surely the list of issues coming out of the review is getting less and less in terms of new issues coming on. But I think when we finished the year, we'll identify if there is anything more but we think is going to impact any of the years that follow. But certainly much less surprises coming out. There is obviously ground support issues to be done across the mine, but these are not urgent. And we think we can do a lot of those concurrently with normal activity. We have to stop these areas because they were really impacting what we thought was safety and not really the required standard we see internationally. But I am not saying any roadblocks for us to get back to normal production. Let me put it that way in the last quarter of the year. At this stage, we believe we can get back to normal production and flow that into next year.

And Patrick your second question as I said if anything we make it would have improved our cost and maybe made a small profit. So the tax implications are going to be negligible.

Are there any more questions, Dillon? We could probably take one more.

There are no further questions, sir.

Well, thanks very much everyone for joining us today. And we look forward to talking to you again following the yearend results. And seeing you lot of you face to face in the various meetings and conferences that we will be doing over the next number of months. And once again thanks for dialing in and showing your interest. And thank you, bye-bye from us.