Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to SSR Mining's Fourth Quarter and Year-End 2019 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Michael McDonald, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to SSR Mining's fourth quarter and year-end 2019 conference call, during which we will provide an update on our business and a review of our financial performance. Our financial statements and management's discussion and analysis have been filed on SEDAR and EDGAR and are also available on our website. To accompany our call, there is an online webcast and you will find the information to access the webcast in our news release relating to this call. Please note that all figures discussed during the call are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated. All references to cash costs and all-in sustaining costs are per payable ounce of metal sold. We will be making forward-looking statements today, so please read the cautionary note in the accompanying presentation. Joining us on the call this morning are Paul Benson, President and CEO; Greg Martin, our CFO; Kevin O'Kane COO; and Carl Edmunds, Vice President, Exploration. Also present is John DeCooman, Senior Vice President, Business Development and Strategy. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Paul for opening remarks.

Thank you, Michael. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to our call to discuss our operating and financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2019. Pleasingly, it was another successful year for us as we continue to deliver on our strategy of creating value for our shareholders. As we start 2020, we have strong operations each providing solid production metrics, robust margins, good mine lives and exploration upside. In 2019, our continued focus on operational excellence resulted not only in our 8th consecutive year of achieving production and cost guidance, it was also our best year as an operating company in terms of our safety performance. The strength of our portfolio and performance is reflected in our cash balance where we ended the year with over $0.5 billion in cash. Each of our mines exceeded the top end of production guidance and they also set new production records. Both Marigold and Seabee are well positioned to continue growing gold production. And if they achieve the midpoint of 2020 guidance, they will each set new production records. At Puna Operations, the mine successfully ramped up to steady state after declaring commercial production in late 2018. Puna finished the year on a very strong note with silver production of 2.1 million ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of $11.18 per ounce in the fourth quarter, demonstrating robust margins at today's silver price. Importantly, all three operations have significant mine lives and we are continuing to invest in the upside potential we see. Yesterday, we released our 2019 reserve and resource report which, once again, highlighted the exploration success of both Marigold and Seabee and built on our track record of mineral reserve and resource growth. At Marigold, mineral reserves increased by 18% to 3.9 million ounces at a slightly…

Thank you, Paul. We finished 2019 with strong operating results for Q4 and for the year. Our safety performance during the last quarter was very good and the recordable incident rate for 2019 was the lowest in our history as an operating company. Operationally 2019 was a successful year across all three sites. We achieved overall production and cost guidance for the 8th consecutive year. In total, we produced 421,800 consolidated gold equivalent ounces, including 106,200 gold equivalent ounces produced in the fourth quarter. Cash costs for Q4 were $716 per gold equivalent ounce while cash costs for the year were $740 per gold equivalent ounce. Each operation exceeded the top end of production guidance for the year. We set yearly production records at all three sites. This was driven by higher grade at Seabee and strong operating performance at Marigold. Puna operations have stabilized, as we had previously indicated would occur, with significantly improved mill throughput and metal recoveries in the quarter. At Marigold, we produced 59,200 ounces of gold in Q4, 12% more than in Q3, mainly due to stacking of higher grade ore in the third quarter that released from the pad during Q4. For 2019, the Marigold mine produced 220,200 ounces of gold, surpassing the upper end of our production guidance. This compares to 205,200 ounces of gold produced in 2018. Production in 2019 benefited from higher grades and ore stacking in the fourth quarter of 2018. Cash costs for Q4 of 2019 were $778 per ounce, 5% lower than in Q3 2019. And cash costs for 2019 were $811 per ounce. During Q4, approximately 6.7 million tonnes of ore were delivered to the heap leach pads at a gold grade of 0.36 grams per tonne. This compares to 6.4 million tonnes of ore delivered to…

Thank you, Kevin. The objectives of our 2019 exploration activities varied by-site, depending on where we saw the most opportunity to add value. As a reminder, we had a prolonged effort to convert the remaining portion of Red Dot Resources to reserves at Marigold. As the year developed, we added exploration lands at the south end of the property. In contrast to Marigold, at Seabee, our focus was on adding underground resources at Gap Hanging Wall proximal to the existing underground infrastructure. We also continued the exploration of Greenfields concepts close to our mines. Our 2019 exploration activities successfully expanded corporate mineral reserves over and above mine depletion for the year. At Marigold, we converted the remaining Mineral Resources at Red Dot to mineral reserve. At Seabee, we significantly expanded Mineral Resources at Gap Hanging Wall while continuing to generate early stage targets on the Fisher property. It is worth noting that we've used the same price assumptions for reserves, $1,250 an ounce and resources $1,400 per ounce for the last four years, so reported gains are not price-driven. Note that we report our resources as inclusive of reserves and that all 2019 figures account for depletion. Marigold Probable Mineral Reserves are 3.89 million ounces of gold showing an increase of almost 18% as compared to 2018 and at a higher average reserve grade. The increase is due to Mineral Resources' conversion success at Red Dot Phases 2 and 3. Referring to the chart which graphically shows the results to reserves at Marigold, depletion and model changes amounted to 330,000 and 50,000 ounce reductions respectively. Conversion at Red Dot and exploration additions combined with pad inventory changes added 960,000 ounces. I want to point out that the modeling changes remove marginal material, improving the economic performance of the mine. In…

Thanks, Carl. As you have heard from the others, our operating momentum continued through the fourth quarter, which combined with higher metal prices drove strong financial performance. The quarter-on-quarter trend through 2019 has been positive, so the expectations we laid out at the start of the year of sequential improvement in financial performance with the ramp up of Puna operations have been delivered. Particularly in this past quarter, the contribution from Puna Operations was a notable improvement while Marigold and Seabee also continued their respective trends of delivering predictable strong performance. For the fourth quarter, we reported revenues of $177.6 million and income from mine operations of $58.9 million. These were increases of 71% and 256% respectively relative to the comparative quarter of 2018 and increases of 20% and 13% respectively compared to the third quarter of 2019. So positive trajectory to our operating performance. Our net income for the fourth quarter was $19.5 million or $0.16 per share. This was well ahead of the loss reported in the comparative quarter and in line with the third quarter. Improvement in mine operating earnings relative to last quarter were offset by higher stock-based compensation expense, higher expensed exploration and higher tax expense. Stock-based compensation was driven by our strong share price performance and tax expense, which was partially driven by stronger operating margins at the mines. However, similar to the third quarter, inflationary tax adjustments applied in Argentina added $6.8 million of non-cash deferred tax expense. Items under our control remained in line with historical and expected levels. Adjusted earnings for the fourth quarter totaled $36.6 million or $0.30 per share compared to $28.4 million in the prior quarter for an approximate 29% increase, demonstrating more clearly the quarter-on-quarter improvement in performance. Turning to the annual numbers, these really highlight the…

Thanks, Greg. So in summary, we continue to be very proud of our consistency, having met or exceeded production and cost guidance for the eight straight year. We are well positioned to continue this momentum with 2020 production forecast to grow to approximately 425,000 gold equivalent ounces with strong margins at current metal - precious metal prices. We also continue to invest in our long-term future through exploration with strong results at both Marigold and Seabee. 2019 continued our track record of creating value by increasing Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources each year and we expect to do the same this year. Looking ahead to SSR Mining, our strategy remains consistent, focused on delivering safe production while investing in our assets and executing on our growth strategy to create value for our shareholders. Our outlook for 2020 and beyond remains bright. This concludes the formal remarks of our earnings call. I'll now pass the line to the operator to take any questions you may have.

Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Cosmos Chiu of CIBC World Markets.

Hi. Thanks, Paul and team. Thank you for the conference call here. Maybe my first question is on Marigold. Kevin, as you mentioned, there is a new leach pad, you'll start stacking on the new leach pad now. Can you speak to any potential positive impact of recovery on cycle time? As you know stack ore on a new leach pad, given that it's lower down, percolation is going to be faster, the leach kinetics. Anything positive that you can speak to.

Sure. No, thanks for the question Cosmo and we started applying solution to that leach pad right at the tail end of Q4. And so we're seeing the benefits now. And so we should, it's positive for Q1. But it was part of our plan, it's part of our guidance, so there's nothing different than what you've already been advised or would have read.

For sure. And then I guess, you know, now that you've built a new leach pad, when is the next sort of construction of the next leach pad?

We're in the process of approving the next leach pad, which would start construction this year. It's in our - it's in our capital guidance for this calendar year and we're in - we're in the early stages of developing a pad, that would probably be built the year after next or the tail end of next year. So it's an ongoing - an ongoing process to make sure that we optimize the irrigation ratios and the leach times.

For sure. And how high are these? I haven't been to Marigold for a few years now. How high are these leach pad, some of the older leach pads like how - how high did they go?

They get to about 400 feet, so 121.6 meters.

Okay, great. Maybe, again, on Marigold but switching gears a little bit. Congratulations on increasing the reserves at Marigold. But I also noticed that total resources decrease a little bit due to depletion and in part due to revised slope angles. I'm just wondering if you can give us a bit more detail on that change in assumption. Is that based on what you've observed in the current pit or is it just based on being a bit more conservative as you consider going deeper into the pit?

Yes, I'll just make a comment first and pass to Kevin or Carl. Yes, you've got to remember that each year, we tend to move the focus of what we - the objectives are in the exploration. This year, it was very much driven around getting to Phases 2 and 3 of Red Dot into reserves. So we didn't have drill rigs elsewhere looking for additional resources. So, don't read too much into the drop in resources. That will be the focus this year. But in terms of the engineering slopes.

Yes, the - as you would know when we first do the initial evaluation of the pits, we make assumptions for the slope angles and also where the ramps go and then with further engineering and our external consultants and reviewing [ph] the size of the High Wall and Red Dot and the ramp configuration is different, which actually has an impact on the ultimate slope. It modified the slope slightly. But as Paul indicated, I mean, it's still early days and that final slope is quite some years away.

Yes. Cosmos, I would also add that in addition to the cost and slope changes, there was a minor amount of loss at the north end of Red Dot, so we call that area in North Red Dot previously.

Great. Maybe moving on to Seabee quickly here, Seabee Santoy. You know you averaged about 950 tonne per day in 2019. You know, as you mentioned you were able to get to about 1050 tonnes per day in December. Is that kind of throughput sustainable? I only ask because if I were to take your 2020 guidance into consideration, and if I were to consider 1050 tons per day for 2020, your production guidance seems to be a bit conservative, let's use that word. So I'm just trying to reconcile those two? And now, on that as well, if you can remind me what's the bottleneck right now at Seabee Santoy in terms of throughput. Is it the mill or is it the mining portion?

Yes, I'll comment first and Kevin can add anything.

Thanks, Paul.

Yes. We've indicated, we've assumed 1050 tonnes per day for the year. So I'm not sure how you back calculate it, you must be making some assumption on a head grade or something like that. But yes, we're comfortable - we're comfortable with the guidance. And as always, we'll review it as we go through the year. But we're assuming 1050, the bottleneck is definitely the mine. What we've shown through some of the graphs in the presentation. The mill can comfortably run at 1200 and we've had days it goes as far up as 1400. So, focusing on debottlenecking in the mine and hopefully we can get it above that 1050 number, but that's certainly the focus for this year. Kevin, anything else?

Yes, no I think that's about it, yes.

Okay.

Yes. I only ask Paul because if it's 950 tonnes per day for 112,000 ounces last year and then 1050 tonnes per day for 110,000 to 120,000 ounces. That's what I mean. It's kind of flat production with increase in throughput. But I think I understand your point in terms of the head grade...

Okay, good one.

And then, maybe one last question here, if I may. Argentina. Puna, we've seen some of your competitors talk about the difficult situation in Argentina and some of your competitors have actually taken a write-down on it. Also talking about export taxes potentially increasing by about 3% beyond what was put out, I guess, 1.5 years, 2 years ago now. Could you comment on the export taxes and you know in terms of the working environment in Argentina and how you approach the - how that might change your approach to Puna.

Sure. I'll let Greg go first.

Sure, thanks Cosmo, I'd say, on balance, we're not seeing any real substantive changes in the operating environment there. Obviously, inflation continues to run high and the currency has been stable of late, but obviously depreciated a fair bit last year. So as we commented before our focus really is on that relationship between inflation and devaluation. That's what most effects the operating performance of the asset. And as you saw from the fourth quarter, the asset is performing very well. Export duties were introduced a while back, they've stayed at the same rate in the adjustments that the government made recently had no impact on the duties that applied generally to the mining goods. So I think they continue to see mining as an important industry to generate export revenues and hard currency that is a requirement for the country. And where we operate, up in the northern part of Argentina, we have a very I think supportive and cooperative relationship with the local authorities that continues to see good stability in the operation. So we did, as noted in our financials, we did test our asset for impairment we did not record any impairment charges as a result of that testing.

Great. Thank you. Those are all the questions I have. Thanks a lot.

Thanks, Cosmos.

Our next question comes from Chris Thompson of PI Financial.

Hi, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. I think Cosmos asked a lot of the questions I was going to ask. But just generally looking at the capex costs, I mean I support your decision to invest in the assets. They're good assets. But generally speaking, looking at Marigold may be next year and you did allude to the fact that you're going to be continuing to build leach pads there. Can we expect similar sort of capex expenditure at Marigold?

We haven't given guidance for 2022 or 2021 year. So whatever is in the technical report, use that as a base. I think what Kevin alluded to, it's always a balancing act with leach pads. You can - you can build - if you don't build them, they get higher you have other restrictions in terms of pumping solutions. So it's just the balancing act and we're trying to get that - trying to get the optimum result there.

Yes. Okay, good enough. Alright, guys, thanks a lot.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Adam Graf.

Hey guys, thanks for taking my questions. Just real quick, I think Cosmos used most of the questions up. But just wanted to - just a quick question about extracting free cash flow out of Argentina. What's your current mechanism and will that change through time and will that present any challenges as far as you guys can see.

Sure, Adam. Thanks for the question. Similar to how we've operated over the last number of years in Argentina, we'd been successful before through the previous number of years to extract the capital that we needed. We continue to have an intercompany loan structure in place that we used to fund part of the Chinchillas construction that provides one avenue and dividends are still an avenue for repatriation out of Argentina. Again, everything we've seen, we haven't tested that mechanism of late, but certainly - again, the government has continued to respect any of the regulations that are in place from our perspective.

So Greg, it's your view that once the intercompany loan facility runs its course, you'll switch to dividends effectively and so far, you haven't seen any issues there for other operations extracting cash out of the country using that method?

Yes. Again, I won't - I won't speak on behalf of others. We haven't tested the dividend mechanism of late, but in general, in regards to our other actions with the government on regulatory and fiscal and exchange issues, we have not run into any particular challenges as of this time period.

All right, fantastic. Again, congratulations guys on finishing up 2019 very strong.

Excellent. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions]

Yes. No, I think we're looking at the queue, there aren't any more. I think Cosmo got all the question for us. So we'll leave it at that. So thanks very much, everyone. Have a good day.

This concludes today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating, and have a pleasant day.