Centerra Gold Inc. Common Shares

Good morning everyone. Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to the Centera Gold fourth quarter 2024 conference call. As a reminder all participants are in a listen-only mode and the conference is being recorded. After the presentation there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To join the question queue you may press star and then 1 on your telephone keypad. Should you need assistance during the conference call you may I would now like to turn the conference call over to Lisa Wilkinson, Vice President, Investor Relations, and Corporate Communications with Centera Gold. Please go ahead.

Thank you operator and good morning everyone. Welcome to Centera Gold fourth quarter 2024 results conference call. Joining me on the call today are Paul Tomori, President and Chief Executive Officer, Paul Charan, Chief Operating Officer, and Ryan Snyder, Chief Financial Officer. Our release yesterday details our fourth quarter 2024 results. It should be read in conjunction with our MD&A and financial statements both of which can be found on CDAR, EDGAR, and our website. All figures are in US dollars unless otherwise noted. Presentation slides accompanying this webcast are available on Centera's website. Following the prepared remarks we will open the call for questions. Before we begin I would like to caution everyone that certain statements made today may be forward-looking and are subject to risks which may cause our actual results to differ from those expressed or implied. Please refer to the cautionary statements included in the presentation as well as the risk factors set out in our annual information form. Certain measures we will discuss are non-GAAP measures. Please refer to the description of non-GAAP measures in our news release and MD&A issued yesterday. I will now turn the call over to Paul Tomori.

Thank you Lisa and good morning everyone. In the fourth quarter we had steady operational performance producing over 73,000 ounces of gold and 12.8 million pounds of copper and we ended 2024 near the low end of our consolidated production guidance range. We generated strong free cash flow of both operations in the fourth quarter driven by robust contributions from Mt. Milligan which increased our cash balance to $625 million. In 2024 we made meaningful progress in executing on our strategic plan to maximize the value of our assets. Since the restart of operations at Uxsut in June 2023 the mine has generated over 480 million of free cash flow. While at Mt. Milligan our additional agreement with Royal Gold created the opportunity to assess the mines long-term potential. In September we announced the restart of operations at Thompson Creek and a progressive ramp up at Langalot marking a major step in unlocking value in our U.S. molybdenum operations. At current metal prices the 397 million of capital investment to restart Thompson Creek is expected to be funded largely from our cash flow from operations at Mt. Milligan and Uxsut. Yesterday we published an initial resource at Goldfield of 706,000 ounces of gold. After a thorough evaluation we decided the resource size does not meet our requirements to support near-term development. We remain committed to maximizing the project's potential while exploring strategic and commercial options for Goldfield. Looking ahead to 2025 we're focused on Mt. Milligan and Chem-S which are the foundations for our future growth. At Mt. Milligan the experimental studies are progressing better than planned and we decide to move straight to completing a pre-feasibility study for the mine. This upgrade together with an extensive drill program planned for this year has the objective of significantly increasing proven and probable reserves at Mt. Milligan once the study results are announced in the third quarter of 2025 making another key step in unlocking the full value of this asset located in the top tier mining jurisdiction. As we look to the future of Mt. Milligan the establishment of the new mining and critical minerals ministry is an encouraging step forward demonstrating the province of British Columbia's commitment to stream mining permitting and regulatory processes for critical mineral projects including Mt. Milligan. We are optimistic about Chem-S which could be a future source of gold and copper production. The property has substantial gold and copper resources in a highly prospective district with significant infrastructure already in place which includes a 300 kilometer 230 kV power line one of the longest privately owned power lines in British Columbia, a 50,000 ton per day nameplate processing plant which would require some refurbishment and equipment replacements, significant site infrastructure, camp, admin facilities, truck shop, warehouse and lastly significant available tailings capacity through a combination of input deposition and expansion potential at the existing TSF. Last year we started evaluating technical concepts and engineering trade-off sites for potential restart options at Chem-S. Early concepts include a combined open pit and conventional underground operation which is expected to be less capital intensive and have better cash flow profile than the previously permitted underground blockade concept. This year in addition to an exploration campaign to further delineate the resource we are continuing to advance technical studies, early indications show potential for a long life operation that takes advantage of our significant infrastructure already in place. We expect to provide an updated resource estimate and an accompanying update on the technical concept for Chem-S in the second quarter of 2025. Finally, I'd like to provide an update on our sustainability initiatives. We remain committed to responsible mining and continue to make meaningful progress in our environmental and permitting efforts. At Mount Milligan we are actively engaged with the government of BC as we prepare to submit an amended application in the coming months for permits and expansions related to our ongoing operations. As I mentioned earlier we are encouraged by the province's approach to streamline the permitting process for critical mineral mines including Mount Milligan going forward. At Oak Suit we successfully obtained permits for expanded infrastructure and activities in alignment with our 2023 EIA and optimized infrastructure. This was achieved through ongoing constructive engagement with government authorities ensuring we continue to meet all operational requirements while maintaining compliance with environmental and regulatory standards. With respect to our efforts on climate change we have completed a thorough analysis of potential greenhouse gas reduction initiatives across our operations. These findings have identified key opportunities that will help shape our long-term strategy ensuring that we pursue emission reductions in a way that is both economically and operationally viable. And with that I'll pass the call over to Paul Charan to walk through our operational performance for the quarter.

Thanks Paul. On slide 10 we show operating highlights at Mount Milligan for the quarter and the full year. Mount Milligan produced almost 38,000 ounces of payable gold and 12.8 million pounds of payable copper in the fourth quarter. Full year 2024 gold and copper production was over 167,000 ounces, 54 million pounds respectively, which was below our guidance range due to lower grades encountered in an area of phases six and nine that are at the periphery of the orbiter. Gold and copper sales were up 4% and 15% respectively quarter over quarter which was anticipated due to the timing of shipments. In 2025 Mount Milligan gold production is expected to be 165,000 to 185,000 ounces and copper production is expected to be 50 to 60 million pounds. In the fourth quarter all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis were $1,114 per ounce, 15% lower quarter over quarter driven by a decrease in sustaining capital expenditures. Full year all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis were $1,078 per ounce at the low end of the guidance range. The site wide optimization program at Mount Milligan continues to progress. The site has reduced operating costs and we continue to see productivity improvements in the load processing costs. In the full year of 2024 milling costs at Mount Milligan were $5.33 per ton processed, 11% lower than 2023 despite a slight decrease in throughput. In 2025 all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis are expected to be $1,100 to $1,200 per ounce. In 2024 Centera identified an opportunity to accelerate the use of in-pit mine potential acid generating waste storage which has increased the available capacity in the existing tailings facility. As a result mine operating costs are expected to improve over the life of mine and there was an increase in the stated reserves at the end of 2024. This resulted in a one year mine life extension to 2036. As Paul mentioned earlier we have made the strategic decision to move directly to a pre-feasibility study for the life of mine plant. We are optimistic the mine life can be extended beyond 2036 which is currently constrained by tailings capacity. We are evaluating options for additional tailings capacity by expanding the existing storage facility or constructing a second facility. It is also expected that the pre-feasibility study will incorporate an increase of annual mill throughput in the range of 10% through ball mill motor upgrades and additional downstream flow sheet improvements at a modest overall capital expenditure which may also provide the benefit of improved overall recovery. The pre-feasibility study and associated mineral reserves estimate are expected to be announced in the third quarter of 2025. Now moving on to IrkSuit. On slide 11 we show operating highlights at IrkSuit for the quarter and the full year. Fourth quarter production was over 35,000 ounces. Okssuit has now completed processing the excess inventory that was accumulated in 2022 and 2023. A total of 4.4 million tons were mined in the quarter and 1.1 million tons were stacked at an average grade of .99 grams per ton. Full year production in 2024 was over 200,000 ounces of gold which was the midpoint of the guidance range. In 2025 gold production at IrkSuit is expected to be 105 to 125,000 ounces driven by a return to normal production levels as planned. In the fourth quarter all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis were $1,327 per ounce which is higher compared to last quarter due to lower sales and higher royalty costs from the elevated gold prices which also contributed to higher cash flows and margins. Full year 2024 all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis were $1,015 per ounce near the upper end of the guidance range. 2025 all in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis are expected to be $1,475 to $1,575 per ounce up year over year primarily due to a lower production profile and partially due to the impact of inflation in Turkey which has not been fully offset but a devaluation of the lira. On slide 12 in the fourth quarter we made great progress on the restart activities at Thompson Creek. Detailed engineering work for the plant refurbishment was initiated with a focus on engineering and procurement for long lead items. Mobile fleet refurbishment is on track and approximately 80% complete with most of the work on trucks, shovels, dozers, and road graders completed. By the end of 2024 Thompson Creek had 170 people on site, two electric rope shovels, and 14 trucks in operation. The project schedule and costs are on track and in line with the plan for the second half of 2027. We expect to commission the remaining haul trucks, shovels, and drills to achieve the planned mine production with a ramp up of the tons mined per month in the early part of 2025. We expect to substantially complete detailed engineering work and procurement of long lead mill equipment by the end of the third quarter 2025. I'll now pass it to Ryan to walk through our financial highlights for the quarter.

Thanks Paul. Slide 13 details our fourth quarter financial results. Adjusted net earnings in the fourth quarter were 37 million or 17 cents per share. In the fourth quarter sales were almost 84,000 ounces of gold and 16.4 million pounds of copper. The average realized price was $2,207 per ounce of gold and $2.88 per pound of copper which incorporates the existing streaming arrangements at Mount Milligan. At the molybdenum business unit approximately 2.9 million pounds of molybdenum was sold in the fourth quarter at the Langloft facility at an average realized price of $22.67 per van. Consolidated all-in sustaining costs on a byproduct basis in the fourth quarter were $1,296 per ounce. Full year 2024 all-in sustaining costs were $1,148 per ounce in line with the guidance range. Slide 14 shows our financial highlights for the quarter. In the fourth quarter we generated strong free cash flow at both operations driven by robust contributions from Mount Milligan. Cash flow from operations on a consolidated basis for the quarter was $93 million and free cash flow was $47 million which includes spending of $23 million on development costs for the Thompson-Crease line. In the fourth quarter Mount Milligan generated $77 million in cash from operations and $65 million in free cash flow. In the fourth quarter we generated $52 million of cash from operations and had free cash flow of $41 million. The molybdenum business unit as a whole used $12 million of cash in operations and had a free cash flow deficit of $35 million this quarter mainly related to spending on the Thompson Creek restart. Returning capital to shareholders remains a key pillar in our disciplined approach to capital allocation. In the fourth quarter we remained active on our share buybacks repurchasing $1.8 million shares for total consideration of $12 million. The board also declared a quarterly dividend of $0.07 Canadian per share. In the full year 2024 we returned $88 million to shareholders including $44 million in share buybacks and $44 million in dividends. A key focus for Sintera is returning capital to shareholders and we expect to remain active on the share buybacks dependent on market conditions. At the end of the year our cash balance was $625 million. This provides us with total liquidity of over $1 billion and positions us well to execute on our strategic plan and deliver shareholder value. Slide 15 shows our 2025 outlook. This year we expect to produce between 270,000 and 310,000 ounces of gold on a consolidated basis driven by Oksut returning to normal production levels. Copper production is expected to be between 50 and 60 million pounds. 2025 consolidated all in sustaining costs are expected to be $1,400 to $1,500 per ounce up compared to last year driven mainly by lower gold production at Oksut and the impact of net inflation in Turkey. We remain disciplined to protect margins through our initiatives at our sites including at Mount Milligan through the site optimization program which will continue in 2025. Sustaining capital expenditures in 2025 are expected to be $97 million to $119 million and non-sustaining capital expenditure guidance is $140 to $160 million mainly driven by the restart of operations at Thompson Creek. In 2025 we expect to rose 13 to 15 million pounds of an increase in volume compared to 2024 as we work to incrementally ramp up Langloft to its full capacity of approximately 40 million pounds per year over the next several years as we previously announced in September. We expect the increased volumes in 2025 will lead to Langloft moving to an EBITDA positive business. We continue to invest in exploration. This year we expect to spend 35 to 45 million including 20 to 25 million of ground field exploration and 15 to 20 million of green field and generative exploration programs. Over 80% of our exploration expenditures are expected to be expensed. We are expecting a solid 2025 with continued strong cash flow generation at our operations allowing us to fund the restart of Thompson Creek and continue to return capital to shareholders while preserving our cash for strategic opportunities. I'll pass it back to Paul for some closing remarks.

Thanks very much, Ryan. Looking ahead to 2025 we're advancing key growth catalysts of both Mt. Milligan and ChemS while continuing to expand our exploration efforts. With great progress on the PFS study at Mt. Milligan and ongoing technical evaluation at ChemS we remain focused on unlocking long-term value and strengthening our asset base for the future. Operator, we can open the call to questions please.

Ladies and gentlemen, at this time we will begin the question and answer session. To join the question queue you may press star and then 1 on your telephone keypad. You will hear a tone acknowledging your request. If you are using a speakerphone we do ask that you please pick up your handset prior to pressing the keys. To withdraw your questions you may press star and 2. Once again, in order to join the question queue please press star and 1. We'll pause a moment as callers join the queue. Once again, if you would like to ask a question please press star and 1. Our first question today comes from Lawson Winter from Bank of America Securities. Please go ahead with your question.

Operator, thank you very much. Paul, hello, good morning and hello to your team. I just wanted to get an idea for your thinking around growing in gold going forward. In particular, OXSOUP, we saw reserves decline there. Is there an interest to expand the presence in Turkey in any way? When you think about gold fields as an option that is not really there any longer, is M&A on the table when you think about growing that gold business? Thank you.

Thanks for the question, Lawson. Our principal focus, so the straight up answer is yes. We are Centero Gold Corporation. We intend to keep gold as our primary metal. In terms of where we look for, valuations for production assets as you've seen in the market are very high right now. Our first order priority is to unlock value within the portfolio. We think that the best path to continued gold exposure is through the extension of Milligan that we described, but also this work we're advancing at ChemS. You've quite rightly pointed out that we're putting gold field on the shelf right now, but ChemS is a major area of focus. That is a very significant mineralized asset. We're looking at different ways to mine that doesn't involve a blockade. First and foremost, our continued exposure to gold will come through the assets that we already own. We are, though, always on the lookout for assets that may fit our portfolio and may fit our strategy. If you ask about Turkey, we are committed to Turkey. We think it's a great place to operate. Should assets become available there, principally in gold, we certainly would be interested in looking at them. I should add that we are active on three or four greenfield exploration programs in Turkey.

Okay, that's interesting. Also wanted to just kind of stay on the capital allocation theme. You guys continue to be remarkably consistent with your buyback and both the dividend. Since those levels of capital return were set, the gold price is $1,000 higher. Is the thinking evolving any further along the lines of potential higher capital return? I know I've asked you this before, but the gold price just keeps going higher and higher. At some point, is there a need to maybe rethink the dividend or maybe get more aggressive on the buyback?

Well, we are committed to the buyback. We think that our shares are cheap and we think they're a great investment, first and foremost. What we're doing right now, and this is a discussion we've been having over the last little while on that capital allocation point, we think that we have some credible projects potentially on the horizon here at Milligan and Chem-S. So our preference is to allocate capital to the gold growth point, to your earlier question, while maintaining our current levels of dividend buyback. So to answer your question, our preference on incremental investments or capital allocation, our preference is to put those to work in gold assets, principally the organic opportunities, but also potentially in M&A.

And then just a final question, which we often talk about is the potential to materially increase gold recoveries at Mount Milligan. What is kind of the target now? Is that evolved in any way? Is it potentially higher than you had thought last quarter or even a year ago this time? And what is now the timeline on getting to a point where those gold recoveries are materially improved versus the 2024 levels then?

Yeah, that's a great question, Lawson, and it's a very key area of focus for us internally. So the first thing I want to say is Q4 was lower recoveries both in copper and gold. And the primary reason was you have to go back to the LOM that we negotiated with Royal Gold. What's happened is we're re-sequencing overall and in periods of time, like in Q4, just open up the pit, get more in-pit storage down the track. We opened up an area that was a little bit periphery to the ore body and then what happened was near the surface, the oxidation partially, we were able to still put it through the plant was a little higher than expected and there was some faulting that we didn't have mapped as well. So that's why Q4 was somewhat lower, but on the positive side, it is because we're expanding and we're looking at this as a 20-year, 30-year mine life, not short-term. And to really answer your question, when we expect it to get better, well, we are better than we were in Q4. And we, I think in terms of numbers in between, I would say mid-60s should be a good target. We're looking at ways that we can recover better, both with the LOM work that we're doing and in the short-term with better understanding of the geomant model and doing some better blending because there are some mineralogical changes throughout the ore body that we're getting better at understanding.

Okay. I look forward to watching that evolve. Thank you, Paul. Thank you both, gentlemen. Thanks, Paul.

Our next question comes from Jeremy Hoy from Canocore Genuity. Please go ahead with your question.

Thanks, Paul and team. Thanks for taking my question. Realizing it's difficult to anticipate what's going to happen over the next four years, could you comment on the potential impact of tariffs on elegant costs and any plans that may be put in place to alleviate those?

Yeah, thanks for that. We're not terribly worried about the tariff situation. We've done an internal assessment that we don't think we're really exposed, but there may be some details, and Ryan, you may want to talk about

how we've

looked at this.

Yeah, sure. We've looked at our operating sites and in the global scale, we think we're generally not going to be too adversely impacted. So 95% of Milligan's costs are from Canadian suppliers. You never know what's going to happen with supplier to supplier arrangements and how those costs pass through, but our supplier base is largely Canadian, and so we don't see even in a tariff world or a retaliatory tariff world a big change in the Milligan cost base. I think we're still hammering away at the M-plus program to try to drive costs down, which offsets any cost creeps that may come. So we feel pretty good about the Milligan costs. And then all the Milligan concentrate is sold into Asia, nothing goes into the US, so there shouldn't be any noise there. Hopefully that answers your

question, Jim. It does. Thank you very much, and I'll step back in the queue.

Our next question comes from Anita Soni from CIBC. Please go ahead with your question.

Hi, good morning, Paul and team. Thanks for taking the question. I just wanted to ask about the reserve and resource update. The great increase at Mount Milligan, I was just wondering what drove that. I think you said drilling, but can you just give me a little bit more granularity

or not? Yep. So Paul, the question was what, Anita, you're a little bit faint there, but I think your question was what drove the great increase in the reserve at Milligan, is that correct?

Yeah, that's correct.

Yeah, that's primarily domaining of where the mineralization is occurring, and we're actually still working on that. You do get what's called soft boundaries on the domains, and then where do you actually draw that boundary? And we remodeled based on the drilling from 2023. And fundamentally, we tightened up the domain so that lowers the amount of ore and increases the amount of waste and increases the grade, and we're still working with where that balance is as we work through the ore body.

Okay, I'm just wondering if you guys, did that have any impact on the near term production profile that we should be aware of?

Yeah, so that's actually one of the reasons why we didn't quite get the production that we had expected at Mount Milligan is because we did get more tons and lower grade overall. So we're looking at readjusting that factor. It won't affect the overall metal, and it won't affect the strip ratio. It's really a fairly minor difference, but that's the work on the grade, and it does vary throughout the ore body as well. So we're continuing to understand that better.

Okay, I guess I'm a little bit confused now. So originally we were talking about higher grades and sort of losing some of the waste in the ore. Sorry, losing some of the waste in the more marginal ore. But now, was it the fact that you were Q4 with presenting sort of problems? Okay. Yeah, I'm not quite sure what I should do with my model at this stage.

Okay, so the new model update has higher grade because you lowered the amount of tons and you tightened up where the mineralization occurs in the domains. And then when you go ahead and mine it, you expect to get those grades. What's happening in some areas, including phase six and nine, you mine it, and then you actually have more ore than you thought, but at a lower grade. So in essence, the mineralization is spread out over a wider area. And so that balance is what we're working through. On the reserves estimate, the grade is higher because the amount of ore is slightly less. So it's a balance between how much ore you have and how much waste you have.

Okay, got it. Did you, can you tell me what kind of geostatistical model you used? That was for, was it ID2, ID3, ordinary krigging? No,

we use ordinary krigging and we used soft boundaries. So the key focus though is the mineralization domain.

Okay. All right, thank you.

And once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star and then one. To withdraw your questions, you may press star and two. Our next question comes from Brian MacArthur from Raymond James. Please go ahead with your question.

Good morning and thank you for taking my question. I apologize. I was cut off if this has been answered, but I have two questions. Just first of all on gold fields. So what is the strategy now? Obviously resources there and it's not near term development. Does that mean you're willing to sell it or does it just mean there's going to be some more work or it's just going to be kind of like chemists was for your years just put in the queue and hold on for a while?

I think it's more of the latter there. So we had three objectives in the year. One was to see if we can get run of mine recoveries. That was a check. Second was see if we can get lower capex. That was a check. And the third was to see if we could grow the resource and then we didn't do it. At least it didn't meet our thresholds to continue to advance the project. So it is going on the shelf right now. You'll have seen that reflected in the impairment we took on the asset and you also asked in there, is it open to a sale or a JV or something? Absolutely. Yes. So what we're the phase we're in right now with gold field is more strategic or commercial rather than technical. But I will say there's gold in the ground there. It just doesn't yet meet our thresholds for amount, but we aren't going to be doing a lot of drilling there. So the focus is more strategic.

Great. Thanks. That's very clear. And just on another strategic issue, any update or comments on potentially a partner on the molybdenum operations? I mean, what's going on? US assets may become more strategic going forward. Is there any comment you can make on that?

Well, say that we know, saying the fact that most people don't seem to like it. We love our molybdenum business. We view it as a high return, high NPV, relatively low risk project in a metal that is in fact strategic, particularly when you look at more macro political situations in the United States. So we really like the business. We are open to some sort of strategic outcome there, but it would have to it would have to meet our minimum requirements on valuation. And there's always interest in the assets, particularly now that we are moving forward with the project. But I'll just reiterate, we do like it. Not always in the fact that it's kind of out of favor with some some more general market sentiment as it relates to Senterra. We do like the business.

Okay, and if my final question just on OXSOUTH was mentioned earlier, obviously, the reserve life there is not that long.

Is

there a lot of potential to extend that? Again, I sort of with all the stockpiling of inventory, I've sort of the mine plan sort of lost a little bit of where we are on everything. So it's sort of four or five years, sort of 100,000 ounces. I think, but is there anything possible to go beyond that?

I wouldn't guide you towards any significant exploration potential of OXSOUTH. However, we need to understand just how much gold is in those heaps. And there may be some potential for a period of residual leaching. Our exploration efforts in Turkey are focused, as I said earlier, at Greenfield-type targets. And we do see some certainly Turkey has extremely attractive geology, and we're trying to take advantage of that more through a Greenfields program rather than a brownfield expansion at OXSOUTH.

Great. Thanks very much for answering my questions, Paul.

And our next question comes from Mike Park and from National Bank. Please go ahead with your question.

Thanks, guys, for taking my question. I'll start with OXSOUTH. Just given the fact we're sitting at almost $3,000 gold, is there an opportunity, like there's always kind of a bit of a perfect balance on the economics on a heap with the amount of like chemicals you're putting on it. But at an elevated gold price environment like we're at, is there a potential to kind of shock the pad, potentially pull additional ounces out by putting in, for instance, like a higher cyanidation concentration where you might get very short-term kind of boosted recoveries that would normally not be economic, but in this gold price environment, they would probably be to drive some of that potential. So, not expected be recovered gold at your standard base case operating metrics, but at an elevated one, you'd get some additional ounces.

Yeah, that's actually a great question. And we look at that all the time, as well as cutoff grades, both at OXSOUTH and elsewhere, just due to the run up on the gold price. The sensitivity to the concentration of the cyanide and then the recovery is not all that high. So, you might get a small amount of gain, but we don't really look at that because when you do the column test, there's not a whole lot of sensitivity to the concentration of the cyanide with respect to recovery.

What about waste that were classified at a lower gold price? Is there ability to potentially reclassify some waste material as ore now?

Not at OXSOUTH, no. I mean, in future, you may look at cutoff grades, but really at the end of the day, the way OXSOUTH, the mineralogy is put together, you're not really looking at a whole lot

of lower grade going into the waste dump. So, Mike, it's not like Nevada, where you have mineralized waste dumps that you could re-leach. Here, it's really, it's not quite this simple, but it's either ore or waste. It's much more delineated than I'd say it would be in Nevada.

Okay, and then I apologize, enjoying the call a little late. I see you've got an interesting slide on chemists. Just from the cross section, it looks like the cross section on slide eight isn't really going through the planned kind of -year-end pit limit. So, am I correct that if you move that to the, assume that's northwest, the line AA, you'd actually see deeper pits pulling in more of that mineralization that you're seeing in the cross section?

So, let's just take a step backward here on chemists. So, the concept that Senterra had was for a block cave, and that's to the right of that cross section on that page. What we've done over the last six, eight months is we've re-looked at all the drill data, and we've re-created a site-wide resource model to see where else there might be mineralization on the property. And what we've concluded, and I think the slide illustrates that, is that we are no longer focused on the block cave, which is over on the right there, but rather on a whole string of near-surface mineralization away from what was formerly the underground concept, and by the way, away from the old North Gate pit. And so, to your question, that's exactly what we're doing, is we're doing a bunch of infill drilling there to see if we can connect those various open-pittable deposits, the area we call the saddle there, the central area, and can we get to a fairly low-strip, reasonably accessible set of open-pittable resources. So, our focus right now is drilling and technical studies, looking at potential concepts there. And as I said in my prepared remarks, we're going to put out a resource here in the early part of the year with some description around what we might look at. There's a lot of mineralization in OICMS. It's a very significant mineralizing system, and the property that we control is quite large.

I might be dating myself, but I remember covering North Gate with Chemisys and that being a bit of a cash cow of an asset for them. Where is that pit? Would that be on that slide or further off to the left? No,

it's this. These deposits are north and west of the old North Gate pit. They're some like eight or nine or 10 kilometers away. And so, I'm getting ahead of myself here, but what we would look at is how would we transport material from these new deposits, should they prove up, over towards the old pit and the old facilities. What we really like about Chemisys, if you were to build a 50,000 ton a day concentrator in that part of BC today, you'd be looking at a two to three, maybe higher billion dollar project. What we have, and I said this in my prepared remarks, we have a power line, probably the longest privately owned power line in BC. We have an air strip. We have a camp. We have the old process plan. And that is really valuable. That infrastructure is really valuable. And the combination of our relook at the site wide resource model and of course, higher commodity prices has given us a degree of optimism in looking at these deposits, which are not near the old North Gate pit. I mean, they're on the property, but they're not particularly close to the old pit.

Okay, that's interesting. I'll look forward to the update.

Thanks Mike.

And ladies and gentlemen, with that, we'll be concluding today's question and answer session as well as today's conference call. You may now disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.