Good morning, and welcome to the GeoPark Limited conference call following the results announcement for the first quarter ended March 31, 2025. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. [Operator Instructions] If you do not have a copy of the press release, it is available at the Invest with Us section on the company's corporate website at www.geo-park.com. A replay of today's call may be accessed through this webcast in the Invest with Us section of the GeoPark Corporate website. Before we continue, please note that certain statements contained in the results press release and on this conference call are forward-looking statements rather than historical facts and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described. With respect to such forward-looking statements, the company seeks protections afforded by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These risks include a variety of factors, including competitive developments and risk factors listed from time to time in the company's SEC reports and public releases. Those lists are intended to identify certain principal factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements, but are not intended to represent a complete list of the company's business. All financial figures included herein were prepared in accordance with IFRS and are stated in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted. Reserves figures correspond to PRMS standards. On the call today from GeoPark is Andres Ocampo, Chief Executive Officer; Jaime Caballero, Chief Financial Officer; Martin Terrado, Chief Operating Officer; Rodrigo Dalle Fiore, Chief Exploration and Development Officer; and Maria Catalina Escobar, Shareholder Value and Capital Markets Director. And now I'll turn the call over to Mr. Andres Ocampo. Mr. Ocampo, you may begin.

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us to review our first quarter 2025 results. Our performance highlights the strength and resilience of the company we've built together, disciplined in operations, focused in strategy and financially robust. Despite persistent market volatility and Brent fluctuations, we delivered solid results while preserving flexibility to pursue value-accretive opportunities. Pro forma consolidated production averaged 36,000 barrels a day, exceeding our base case guidance of 35,000 barrels a day. This strong delivery was driven by stable output across our core assets in Colombia and Ecuador and another record-breaking quarter from the new Argentina assets. These acquired Vaca Muerta blocks continue to demonstrate their transformative potential within our portfolio with gross production reaching a record high of over 17,000 barrels a day in February. In the Mata Mora Norte Block, our partner, Phoenix completed PAD-9, drilled PAD #12 and began the construction of new central processing facilities targeting 40,000 barrels a day gross capacity by mid-2026. Drilling also began on the second exploration pad in the Confluencia Sur block following last year's pivotal Rio Negro discovery. First quarter financial results do not yet consolidate production, revenue or costs from these assets pending the completion of regulatory approvals by provincial authorities. We continue to work diligently to advance the approval process. We acknowledge that the delay in obtaining this approval has created material uncertainty around the timing and successful completion of this transaction. The agreement includes an outside date of May 13, 2025, marking 1 year since signing a standard milestone in transactions of this kind. After that date, either party has the right under the terms of the agreement to withdraw from the transaction. Unless the termination notice is given, the agreement remains fully in place and continues without change. Within this framework, the parties…

[Operator Instructions] And our first question today comes from Alejandro Demichelis from Jefferies.

First, Andres, best of luck in your new endeavors. It has been really a privilege to have you as a CEO. It has not always been plain sailing, but you have done very well with the challenges. The first question, Andres, is how are you seeing the situation about CapEx, production growth in the current kind of oil price environment? Obviously, you have hedged part of your production, but kind of looking at a bit more kind of medium term. That's the first question. And then the second question is you touched on the process of closing the deal in Argentina. Maybe you can give us some kind of more color on how discussions are kind of going with both your partner and also with the progress.

Alejandro, thank you for your comments and also for your questions. If you want, I will start with your second question, and then I will leave Jaime to address the production CapEx outlook and oil prices. So as I said in the introduction, the results for the first quarter do not include pro forma production revenues or costs relating to this transaction because it's still pending the approval. These assets were effectively acquired on July 1, 2024. And as of today, the transaction has not been closed and remains subject to the completion of these approvals. We, as a company, remain focused on closing the transaction and continue working diligently to advance the approval process. I personally have also agreed with the Board that as part of the CEO transition, I will continue supporting personally this process as long as required. I think it was you that mentioned in your report, no unfinished business. So that's my commitment to the company on top of others. The agreement that we have with our partner includes an outside date, as we mentioned before, which is on May 13 this year. That marks 1 year since signing and it's basically standard milestone in transactions of this kind. After that date, either party has the right under the terms of the agreement to withdraw from the transaction. So unless a termination notice is given, the agreement remains fully in place and continues without any change. And within this framework, the parties may also explore potential strategic alternatives, taking into account the information and the context available at such time. GeoPark made a decision to enter Vaca Muerta following a long-term strategic growth plan of expanding our footprint in big basins and in big plays, which Vaca Muerta is obviously one of them. So as…

Alejandro, I'm going to take your question around the outlook. It's Jaime here. So [indiscernible] on outlook, our -- I would basically tell you that our outlook remains unchanged when we think from a work [indiscernible] standpoint. And the basis for that is that we basically created a plan for 2025 that was built around a capital allocation criteria of everything being economic, value accretive and cash positive at $60 a barrel. That was the key principles of the plan, right? And with that, it actually means that our capital deployment is designed -- by design to work at this -- at the current price environment that we're seeing. Further to that, as you rightly mentioned, we hedge actively and 70% or so of our volumes for this year are hedged. So we are well covered. Our average Brent realizations are currently [indiscernible] type Brent price for that 70% that's hedged. There's a 30% that is not hedged that is at kind of spot market prices more or less. When you look at the average, it actually puts us in a very comfortable position. Further, it's important to note that our entry point into this price decline is a very solid [indiscernible] set of results that we delivered, strong EBITDA, leaner cost structure, very strong cash position. We have more than $300 million of cash in the bank. So where I'm going at this is that we don't see any reason whatsoever to change our capital allocation for this year in this price environment. So we remain committed to the program that we announced earlier this year, and that's what we intend to execute.

The next question comes from Daniel Guardiola from BTIG.

First of all, I wanted to wish you, Andres, all the best in your future endeavors. It was truly a pleasure to get to meet you and to know you all and to do all the insightful meetings we did in the past. So really, I truly appreciate that. Going to the questions, I just wanted to do a follow-up on Argentina. I mean I just wanted to confirm what you mentioned on the contract with Phoenix. I just want to confirm that if on May 13, each party decides to walk away if they can do it freely without penalties. And if that's the case, if you believe that scenario is a realistic scenario that could happen in the next days. So that's my first question. The second one is, I don't know if you can share with us what are the requirements that are preventing this transaction from getting closed? And just a third one, if I may. It would be great if you can share with us if you are considering -- I know you are very well hedged for the next 9 to 12 months. It would be great to know if you're considering right now to take some measures to further streamline the company in terms of OpEx and CapEx to better weather the current uncertain storm that we are going through. So those are my questions, guys.

Daniel, thank you for your comments. And likewise, it has been a great run and appreciated all the multiple million meetings and trips together. It was certainly really fun and great for me. I will start -- again, I'll just try to address your points on Argentina. I think I I've said a lot, and I covered most of it in my previous response. But specifically, you're asking about if there's anything specific, any requirements. We've complied with all the requisites, and we've presented all the requirements. And at this stage, there's no specific requirements that is impeding us to close the transaction. So -- and whether your second point about what happens on the outside date, as I said, each party has the right to withdraw from the contract. And yes, that's under -- with no penalty. And the reality is I cannot comment on whether each party -- what each party is going to do with whatever rights they acquired at any point at this stage. That is the factual reality of the contract today. And I don't know if I missed anything else with respect to Argentina. Otherwise, I leave it to Jaime.

Daniel, on your question around weathering the current volatility, I think the key elements, I already described them in the previous answer. I think obviously, not ignore market context. We are in a very solid position to face this market context. And -- but what I can tell you at this stage is that the sort of things that we're looking into, given the market context is probably 3 things, I'd say, in terms of what's changed. I think we have -- we are in an ongoing conversation about capital allocation priorities. We are always in that conversation. And it's to anticipate stuff, right? And in the context of that conversation, what we're seeing is that our willingness and ability to deploy capital is unchanged. It's unchanged. So for instance, in organic agenda, we're actually seeing the current price environment actually as an opportunity. We have an important cash position right now. It gives us flexibility. It gives us flexibility. And it allows us to react to different outcomes that we might find along the way, right, given the uncertainties that we have. For instance, Andres has spoken about the uncertainty around Vaca Muerta, and we believe that having the cash position that we have right now actually puts us in a good position to face that uncertainty. So that's one thing that I would say in terms of how we're thinking about weathering the current environment. The other thing that I would say is around costs. And as you probably saw in the results, we delivered some important cost efficiencies in the first quarter relative to the fourth quarter. I would say that we have already started to change our trajectory in terms of cost. And the way that we're thinking about it is a broader conversation about total cash cost that has 4 elements to it. There is an element around OpEx. There is an element that Martin -- I'm actually going to ask Martin to talk about it in a moment. There is an element around structure or G&A, and you saw our announcements that we did a few weeks ago [indiscernible] interventions that we did in that area. There is an element around tax efficiency. You probably saw that relative to 4Q, we're starting to see a lower tax effective rate, and that's something that we're tackling to going into the future to see if there's more opportunities. And of course, there is a last component around cost, which is related to the midstream and transportation costs. So where I'm trying to go here is we are looking at all of them. We are [indiscernible] I don't -- I can't say at this time that we have changed our guidance or targets around any of this because we believe that our plan remains solid, and we don't need to. But we're actively looking at all of these to see if there's more opportunities that can be captured, that's where we are, Daniel.

Our next question comes from Joaquin Robet from Balanz Capital.

So my first question is, you have secured a solid hedge position for 2025, driving some protection against current oil price volatility. Are you planning a similar approach for 2026? If so, at what price levels would you feel comfortable locking in hedges? And how much of your price scenario looking to hedge?

Joaquin, Yes. So to your question around hedging, so we have a long-standing policy around hedging. I would say that hedging is an integral part of our financial framework, and we don't see any reason to change it. As a matter of fact, we -- what we're seeing right now is the value of the hedges and the benefit that it brings to the company and the strategic flexibility that it brings to the company. So we don't intend to change that as a general rule. And the way that I would frame [indiscernible] that we want sufficient hedging coverage to ensure that our capital programs remain unchanged in the midst of market volatility. That's what we aim for. That's how we're thinking about it, and that's how we are monitoring 2026, right? It's still early days to give you a number, a specific number around that because there are some market realities that we need to navigate. Right now, if you try and obtain hedges for [indiscernible] the sort of prices that you're going to get are prices that are heavily impacted by the existing uncertainty that we're seeing right now. So it's a bit of a timing thing. So our [indiscernible] and see how market conditions develop, which is what we've done historically. This is no different to what we've done in the past, which is we monitor the market actively and then we make decisions around what are the floors and what are the [indiscernible] acceptable and competitive for ensuring a consistent delivery of our plan. So too early to give you a number on what price frame we're going to hedge 2026. What I can say at this time is that we do intend to hedge. We are monitoring that. And as market conditions evolve, if we see good opportunities to capture price [indiscernible] continuity of our programs, we will execute on that.

Great. My second question would be, we noted that net leverage increased to 0.9x following the 2030's issuance. What level of leverage do you consider comfortable? And what is your target cash position for the year?

So on the leverage side, I'd say that we are in the way too comfortable box right now. It's a very low ratio, 0.9. I do take in your comment that you see that it's growing, but it's actually quite marginal. I think our general guidance is that we intend to maintain a leverage ratio over the long term of around 1.5. So we're well below that. And that view of 1.5 being a long-term kind of gravitational pool is unchanged. We believe that, that still makes sense for the company. Of course, we always monitor changing market conditions, right? If market conditions change dramatically, right, dramatically to the point of stress testing our financial framework, we might take a second look at that. But as you can see, the assets that we have, the low breakevens, the cash position that we have, the nature of our debt profile, which is pushed into the long term, the healthy cash contribution that our assets are making [indiscernible] environments, all those elements put us in a position where we're sailing comfortably the current environment. Thanks, Joaquin.

The next question comes from Cristian Fera from KNG Securities.

So I have 2 questions. First one is, if you could please share any updates or revisions to the guidance for the Colombian operations. And in that regard, we would appreciate your view on the Brent price assumptions and differentials.

Cristian, so let me recap your question. So it's [indiscernible] and the outlook on Brent, right?

Brent and differential.

And Brent and differentials. So

Guidance for the Colombian operations plus Brent, including differentials.

Okay. Great. So let me give you some general comments [indiscernible] guidance on both aspects. And then perhaps Martin can give us a little bit more color around specifics in the Colombia operation. So the big frame for our guidance is what we said when we launched 2025 was we were aiming for a pro forma production of 35,000 barrels a day, right? That was our guidance from a production standpoint. CapEx expenditures of between $275 million and $310 million, lifting cost in the $12 to $14 per barrel and adjusted EBITDA in the $70 million to $80 million type price range of between $340 million to $420 million. So that's -- those are, if you will, the goalposts. And what has changed since then? And I'd say basically that there's 2 things that I would say, do not change the guidance, but need to be incorporated in understanding the outlook and what you're actually going to see in our consolidated results, right? Because that was a pro forma guidance. So the first component [indiscernible], right? And as you know, we announced a couple of divestments in the first quarter that have an impact on production. They make a lot of sense from a portfolio standpoint and from a cash standpoint and from a capital allocation standpoint and the like. But from a volumetric standpoint, they do have an impact, and it's an impact of about 1,000 barrels a day on an annual basis. So that 35,000 barrel guidance becomes 34,000 when you make that adjustment, right? So that's the first point of note. The second point of note is the timing of the Vaca Muerta closing because we cannot consolidate results until the closing occurs, right? So as Andres explained previously, from an economic standpoint, there is no change…

Yes. So Cristian, I'll go a little bit [indiscernible] of the key assets that we have. When we look at Llanos 34, as we mentioned in the past, Llanos 34 it's a more mature field. And with our activity, we are expecting decline rates in the order of 15% to 18%. The first quarter of the year was well within that guideline. So we feel in Llanos 34 that we will be delivering the plan that we have. We have a couple of updates in Llanos 34, like Andres mentioned, we were expecting the drilling activity to start in January, and it took us a little bit longer to socialize the incorporation of the rig, but the results have been doing very well, actually slightly better than what we expected. So about 1.5 years ago, we set the strategy that we needed -- this is a mature asset. We need to do things different. So we brought a rig that is the newest generation rigs that are available, and we set a target to drill and complete the wells at 25% less. So that's basically for the well from $4.1 million to go to around $3 million. We have 4 wells that we drilled, and we have the first one that we drilled and complete, and it was done at $2.75 million. So we feel good about how that fresh production is coming. The results from the well is producing around 450 barrels of oil per day. And in our plan, we had less than that. So again, this is a program. It's a 6-well program. So far, the results are doing very well. We're drilling the well safely. And the last one that we finished reaching the bottom depth, the total depth, we're about to check, but we believe…

Jaime here again. I recognize that I didn't address your point around Brent. So I'm going to do that really quickly. So basically, our Brent outlook, let me give you 3 numbers. The first number is our plan. So our plan was done at $68 a barrel. Obviously, as I said before, I do say -- we do sensitivities at $60 [indiscernible] we do capital allocation at $60. So this sort of price environment is by no means a surprise to us. Two, our outlook. We -- our internal view is that full year prices are going to gravitate towards [indiscernible].

Apologies, Jaime. Apologies for the interjection. We do need to swap to a backup line.

Can you hear now? Is that okay?

Yes, you're back live and sounding good. Please continue when you're ready.

Okay. Great. Fantastic. So on Brent, I was saying 3 numbers. One, our plan has been developed at $68 and capital allocation has been done at $60. So no fundamental changes from that standpoint. Two, our outlook, our internal outlook around full year prices for 2025 is that they're going to be in the $66 to $68 range. This is by no means precise, but directionally, what it suggests is that the prices that we saw in 1Q, which were higher, prices -- price realizations were in the $72 to $73 type range for that quarter. It will compensate some of the softer prices that we're going to see over the next 3 quarters. Again, remember here that we are hedged and the effect of that on us is very limited. And last but not least, differentials. So the Vasconia differential is actually offsetting part of this fall in Brent prices. What we're seeing -- what we have been seeing is an important compression in the Vasconia differential. Historically, we've seen that differential in the $5 to $6 range. It's actually currently in the $2.5 a barrel type spot price right now. So it's become very competitive, and it's offsetting part of the declines that we're seeing in the headline Brent price. Hope that helps, Cristian. Thank you.

Perfect. Just to recap a couple of numbers. So excluding Argentina, you would expect around 30,000, 32,000 barrels per day roughly for the year, and that's consistent with an EBITDA, assuming some OpEx normalization between, let's say, $330 million or maybe $360 million for the year. Would you be comfortable with that figure?

I didn't pick up the $330 million, $360 million point. What I can tell you is that consolidated production closing -- if we close the Vaca Muerta transaction in May is of 32,000, 33,000 barrels a day. That is true. That will be the consolidated number that we would be posting on a full year basis. The $330 million number, I'm not sure, where you got that from.

Okay, that will be including Vaca Muerta, you're saying?

Yes.

Okay. Perfect. And my second question is if the acquisition in Argentina is not approved, how are you thinking about potential cash uses considering the strong position that you have at the moment? And minor additional question is if you could clarify this deadline date that you have. So you said it's May 13, that would be next week. And starting that date, either party can leave the contract. That's correct?

Yes. So a couple of things. Let me take first your first point around how we would think about capital allocation in a scenario of not closing, right, Vaca Muerta. So right now, a couple of things to note, right? The first thing is upon closing the transaction, which continues to be what we are actively working on, which is closing the transaction, what we see is a capital disbursement, which is in the area of $230 million to $240 million. That's a combination of $152 million or $155 million or so of the original acquisition cost and a balance of around $80 million to $90 of the interim period. The interim period is what has occurred, the activities that have occurred between July 1 of last year and the actual closing, right? So that's the money that's going out the door if we close Vaca Muerta right now, $230 million to $240 million, right? That's the first consideration. If we do not close and the transaction doesn't close for any reason, we don't have to allocate that money basically, right? And the way that we're thinking about it is probably a 3-tier structure, which is consistent with our strategy, which is, one, we will continue to pursue growth opportunities for the company. We have a pipeline associated to that, that we have continued to work on, and we would prioritize that. The intent is to bring reserves and production to the company consistent with the long-term aspiration that we have. So that will be the first capital allocation priority. The second capital allocation priority is, I would say, would be around optionality, strategic optionality and things that we could consider around perhaps looking at our debt and reviewing those debt levels, although we are comfortable with the existing debt levels, we could review them if the market conditions are appropriate for that. So that's optionality, right? Buybacks also are optionality that we would be considering. So that's there. But if I have to tell you a firm view, I would say 2 things. First, ensuring continuity of our organic plan; two, ensuring that we have the ability to pursue the inorganic pipeline that we have been actively working on. Again, these are options. We remain focused on closing the transaction, and we continue to work diligently to advance that approval process. So with regards to your question on the outside date, Andres already made a long statement around that, which I don't think we need to repeat. Thank you.

The next question comes from Isabella Pacheco from Bank of America.

First of all, I would like to congratulate Andres on your trajectory and the impact you had on GeoPark in these past years. And I think that most of my questions have been already answered. So I just have one specific question around production in Colombia. So I know that Llanos 34 is facing natural declines, but I would like to know if there were any other operational disruptions that led to lower production levels? And if possible, could you please break down production by key assets and explain where the shortfall came from?

Isabella, this is Martin. So again, I'll go back to a high level, and then we can go into the details. But overall, in the first quarter, we had no surprises. Our guideline was exceeded. And if we just focus on the Colombia assets, and I'll -- basically, we're delivering according to our plan. Yes, there's -- every now and then, there are some one-offs. But -- so for example, we had around 12 days of blockages in CPO-5, but that was within our guidelines, something that we learned from last year. So when we did our downtime estimations for 2025, we put a range and those days are within the range that we put. So I'll stay in CPO-5 and then I'll go to the other assets. In CPO-5, we are delivering according to the plan and actually exceeding. The exceeding is basically because the -- like I mentioned before, the plan for the first part of the year was to do workovers on wells, which by natural flow, they were getting to low production levels. And so we put a pump. And that's something that is normal in the maturity of the reservoir, and it was successful. So we got incremental production from that. So CPO-5 is delivering according to the plan. I will go now to Llanos 34. In Llanos 34, we've been delivering in the order of 94% to 95% production efficiency. So what that means is that it's within the plan that we had. So what -- the only thing that did not deliver exactly according to the plan was the infill drilling campaign, which in our program, we had it starting in January. And it took us a little bit longer to socialize. But again, like I mentioned before, we got this rig running…

We have some questions from the webcast. Vicente Falanga from Bradesco asks, how much more cost efficiency can the company achieve?

Vicente, we share a lot of color, I think, around how we're approaching costs. And I guess what I could add, the further color that I could add on this is that it's around flexibility, right? I cannot give you a number on technical limit. But what we've done is we look at our peer group. We look at our operating environments, both in Colombia and in Argentina, and we're regularly monitoring and testing ourselves to ensure that in those peer comparisons, we show up well. That's one of our key approaches towards that. A second approach that we've had is we actually bring outsiders to look under the hood and kick the tires. We did such exercise with BCG late last year, and it gave us this -- on one hand, it told us that we have an extremely efficient operation. But at the same time, it illuminated a few medium- and long-term opportunities that we're looking into, right? And probably Martin can give us a little bit of color around that. We also look at the cost chain from an integrated standpoint. So we don't just focus on one specific point of the cost, but the totality of how we approach developments. For instance, when we look at Argentina, it's not just about the lifting costs, which are extremely competitive in the $5 to $6 type range per barrel. But we actually look at the development decisions that we're making with Phoenix to ensure that over the long run, that remains efficient. I know I'm not giving you a specific number because we don't have it. I think it's more of an approach. And our approach is we want to be as competitive as we can possibly be, right? Obviously, ensuring safety, integrity and the reliability of our operation. Within those constraints, we look to be as best as we can, and those are the things that we're working on.

Yes. I would just -- Vicente, I would just add to Jaime that, again, reiterate that we're in the low side of our range on the $12 to $14 per barrel guidance, like Andres mentioned in the first Q, we were at $12.3 million. Our man and women working in the field, but also supporting those field guys here in the office are all very aligned that number one is to have safe operations, but we know that to be competitive and we have done it historically, we had to have low OpEx. And I'll give you a couple of examples of the things that we've done and the ones that we're working. I think that the connection got cut when we were talking about that. But we've done things together with a famous group on reviewing our contracts and looking at long-term contracts. And so a portion of the numbers that you see are related to that. We have looked at staffing -- in the field, we have looked at things that we can optimize. So reducing the number of trucks that move around by innovatively in the pump so that the bottoms from the tanks doesn't mean that we're having 15 trucks going out of the field every 3 days. Now we only have one. And that is not only OpEx savings, but we're reducing the chance of somebody getting hurt. We're reducing our emissions. So those are examples of the things that we already did. Examples of the things that are coming, we're looking in very detail at our maintenance strategy, how are we doing our maintenance and it's integrated, not only the contracts that we have, but are we doing the maintenance properly and can we optimize even further depending on what kind of criticality the equipment has. And we feel that with that, we're going to probably optimize a little bit more chemicals, artificial lift and pooling. I mean we have done a very good job. The guys in the field have done a very good job from facilities to artificial lift to have really reliable energy. And with that, it means that our pumps don't fail that often. And if the pumps don't fail, it means that our OpEx and pooling go down. And when we look at the benchmark, our days between failures in Llanos 34 are actually top ranked not only in Colombia, but worldwide. So that's the philosophy and what our teams are working on day-to-day.

I think I would like to end the call without making just one highlight on -- and I think a special mention to Martin's team because we made some comments, and I'm not sure if they were very well captured. The fact that we drilled the last well in Tigui in 6.1 days. And I mentioned that in my introduction and as we were in the call, we got the report for the following well, which is the Tigui 56 well, we reached TD in 4.5 days. That has to be some record in the basin, not only in the block, and we're checking that. But this means that we spud a well on Monday and we reached TD before the end of Friday. That's a huge saving. The team was targeting to reach wells that we drilled last year for $4.1 million to drill them and completing them this year at $3 million, and the first one has already come in at less than $2.75 million. And this one is obviously going to come cheaper than that. So that relentless effort in finding efficiencies, breaking paradigms and making sure that we make the most out of each dollar that goes to the ground is what motivates this team, and I think they are doing an incredible job. So thanks very much for your question. So I think that's the end of the call. There's no more questions. So I would like to thank everybody for your interest in and your support of GeoPark. And the team is always here to answer any questions. Please reach out, give us a call or even better, please visit our operations. Thank you, and have a good day.

This concludes today's call. Thank you very much for your attendance. You may now disconnect your lines.