McEwen Inc (MUX) 2016 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the McEwen Mining full year and Q4 financial results conference call. I would now like to turn the meeting over to Mr. Rob McEwen, Chief Owner. Please go ahead, Mr. McEwen.

Thank you, operator. Good morning, fellow shareholders. Ladies and gentlemen, today, we are going to discuss our 2016 financial and operating results and provide you with our outlook for 2017. Andrew Elinesky, our Chief Financial Officer, will review our 2016 financial performance, and then Xavier Ochoa, our President, will review last year's operations and discuss what we have planned for this year. But before I ask them to present, I'd like to make several comments.

I was very pleased with our performance in 2016 for several reasons. First, we significantly improved our financial strength. Our treasury doubled in size and now stands at $55 million. I want to emphasize that this growth in the treasury was achieved from operations. It was not the result of a debt or equity financing or a sale of metal streams or royalties. Second, the change in government in Argentina to a pro-business, pro-foreign investment administration, coupled with improved gold, silver and copper prices, has definitely increased the value and contribution of these assets in our portfolio. Third, we added significant depth to our senior management in areas of project management, construction and underground and open pit operations. These additions were done in preparation for our next phase of growth, which we are now entering. This phase of growth includes new production coming on stream in Nevada and the change in the ore type in Mexico and the belief that the exploration potential there is greater than originally envisioned.

I'd now like to ask Andrew to tell you about our financial performance in 2016.

Thank you very much, Rob, and thank you to everyone else for joining us today. I am pleased to report the company had another solid performance in the fourth quarter to allow us to finish out a strong year. Firstly, each operation met their annual guidance for the production of gold-equivalent ounces, while we also beat our annual guidance for both cash and all-in sustaining costs per ounce. Secondly, the company swung to an annual net income of $21 million or $0.07 per share. And as a result of this performance, we've grown our working capital and treasury balances, as Rob said, and ended the year significantly higher with $59 million in liquid assets and no debt. On a consolidated basis, the gold-equivalent production for the year came in at just over 145,000 ounces, which was just slightly above our guidance of 144,000 gold-equivalent ounces.

Before moving on to the cost-per-ounce discussion, I'd like to point out that going forward, the company will start providing guidance and results, as you've seen in our press release yesterday, for this metric. It's going to be reported on a per operation basis instead of the consolidated basis. So with regards to those cash costs, both of our operations exceeded our improved guidance as opposed to our original guidance by over $20 per gold-equivalent ounce. All-in sustaining costs of both sites were both comfortably under guidance as well. As a result of these decreased costs and higher gold and silver prices, our earnings for mine operations increased by 23% to just over $64 million when compared to 2015. As mentioned, this performance for both of our mines was obviously reflected in our improved treasury balance. As we said, we ended the year with just under $59 million, which compares to the ending balance at the end of 2015 of $32 million plus $3 million in debt that we were carrying at the time. This balance is now, as of the 27th of February, is just over $55 million. This increase in liquidity allowed the company to continue with its increased investment plans, both on the exploration and project development fronts, as well as maintaining our semiannual dividends or return of capital.

Looking to the sites. In Mexico, we had our second consecutive year of strong production and low costs. This was the result of operational improvements and strong grades, combined with cost and input savings as well as a weaker Mexican peso when compared to the U.S. dollar. Gold grade declined in the second half of the year, as expected, due to the planned transition to the lower-grade Lupita pit during the year. And obviously, we maintained our focus on reducing our costs and keeping them low so as to continue our strong operational cash flow generation at El Gallo.

Moving over to Argentina. The continued steady operational performance of the San José mine for the year was helped by the export tax eliminations, which the federal government eliminated early in 2016, as well as the continued foreign exchange savings as they allowed their peso to become more free-floating.

Our attributable income from the mine was significantly higher in 2016 when compared to 2015, when it rose to an income of just under [$30 million] for the year compared to just over [$2 million] in 2015. This increase in profitability allowed the joint venture to issue to us just under $18 million in dividends for the year, which was an obvious significant increase over 2015 when we only received total dividends of $0.5 million. Given the revised operating environment in Argentina as well as improved metal prices, we are not expecting an interruption to dividend payments. Regarding our financial statements, as mentioned at the start of the call, the strong operational performance has resulted in the company reporting an annual net income of $21 million or $0.07 per share, which was an obvious significant change from the prior year when we reported a net loss of over -- just over $20 million or $0.07 per share. This was primarily driven by the result of the previously discussed increases in our income from the San José mine, while the decrease in revenue in Mexico was offset by an 18% reduction in the cost of goods sold at the El Gallo 1 mine.

Once you add these improvements in operating income to the absence of any impairment charges, unlike the ones that were reported in prior years, the end result is a swing from a net loss in 2015 to a net income in 2016.

Moving over to cash generation. Cash flow from operations for the year was $25.2 million or $0.08 per share. This was an increase of 61% when compared to 2015, which saw $15.6 million or $0.05 per share generated. During the year, we were also able to execute on a number of corporate initiatives, the first of which was the continuation of our dividend or the return of capital payments, which we commenced in late 2015. Secondly, a redemption of all the remaining exchangeable shares issued as part of the Minera Andes acquisition back in 2012 has left the company with only 1 class of share and a reduction in administration cost.

And finally, the conclusion of the stock repurchase program, which the company initiated in late 2015 as well, saw us buyback and cancel a total of 2.5 million shares at an average price of just $0.96 per share.

At this point, again, I would like to thank you very much for taking the time to join us today. And I will now turn the presentation over to our President and COO, Mr. Xavier Ochoa.

Thank you, Andrew. In terms of our operations on projects, I would like to start by recapping our 2016 production performance. Consolidated gold-equivalent production in 2016 totaled 145,530 ounces, consisting of 90,264 gold-equivalent ounces from our 49% interest in the San José mine in Argentina, and 55,266 gold-equivalent ounces from the El Gallo mine in Mexico.

In terms of our different operations, I would like to start with the El Gallo Gold mine. At the El Gallo Gold mine, we met our 2016 production guidance of 55,000 gold-equivalent ounces with production of 55,266 gold-equivalent ounces. Ore grades processed during 2016 averaged 2.14 grams per ton gold compared to 3.41 grams per ton gold in 2015, and this was the result of having mined out the highest-grade portion of the Samaniego pit. We plan to produce 49,700 ounces of gold and 24,000 ounces of silver, totaling 50,000 gold-equivalent ounces from the El Gallo mine. Production costs are expected to increase on account of lower grade and mining deeper portions of the deposits where the presence of sulfide materials is increasing, with an impact on the recovery efficiencies and our unit processing costs. The total cash cost for the El Gallo mine is forecasted to be $760 per gold-equivalent ounce and an all-in sustaining cost of $900 per gold-equivalent ounce. During 2016, we'll be mining from 3 pits, out of which 1 is nearing the end of its life. Brownfield exploration at the El Gallo Gold mine site is focusing on previously unidentified satellites of the current operation and exploring what appears to be extensions of the ore bodies being mined as we speak.

For 2017, we have budgeted a total of $3.4 million in sustaining capital and $1.5 million for exploration activities at the El Gallo Gold mine proper. For the El Gallo Silver project in Mexico, during 2016, we further advanced studies on the feasibility and development for the El Gallo Silver project with the objective of identifying opportunities to reduce the initial capital investment required to start the project as well as identify certain synergies within the El Gallo Gold mine, which will help us, together, reduce capital and operating costs to bring the financial decision threshold to a lower point on the silver price curve. That is to say, give us the financials we seek at lower silver prices.

We're also looking at the adoption of modularization such as for crushing plants and simplification of support facilities that will help improve timelines and costs. The work conducted has also indicated the opportunity to schedule differently the deposits which are part of the El Gallo Silver project to improve the project's economics. In addition, other significant opportunities under evaluation are bolting on to the El Gallo Silver project other deposits we have been exploring in the districts, which could be processed using the plant there, and reassessing the location of the different facilities to take the most advantage of these other deposits. We expect to have a better picture of what these opportunities are by the end of the second quarter of 2017. For 2017, our budget for El Gallo Silver is approximately $6 million consisting of $3 million for exploration and $3 million for development-related activities. At the San Jose mine in Argentina, during 2016, our 49% interest in the San Jose mine production amounted to 90,264 gold-equivalent ounces, which was slightly above our guidance of 89,000 gold-equivalent ounces. Production for 2017 is expected to be 50,000 ounces of gold and 3,300,000 ounces of silver, totaling 94,000 gold-equivalent ounces from the San Jose mine. As of year-end, measured and indicated reserves were estimated at 1.817 million tons, containing an average gold grade of 7.06 grams per ton and a silver grade of 465 grams per ton. This represents a contained total of 412,000 ounces of gold and 27 million ounces of silver, which on an equivalent gold basis is 789,700 gold equivalent ounces. Measured and indicated mineral resources at year-end were 3.5 million tonnes, containing a gold grade of 6.4 grams per tonne and a silver grade of 404 grams per tonne of silver.

For 2017, total cash costs and all-in sustaining cost of San José mine are forecasted to be $780 and $990 per gold-equivalent ounce. Also in 2017, the San José mine will continue with exploration activities on its property as well as the surrounding area.

Now changing to the Los Azules project also in Argentina, up in the Andes. During 2016, we continued to advance baseline environmental and optimization studies and other activities required by the Los Azules project. The 2017 drilling season was started at the beginning of the year with an initial budget of $6.4 million to be spent in the first quarter, with further drilling dependent on the weather and results. Some of you may know, the weather becomes a significant factor on the length of the drilling season. Also in 2017, we plan to spend $3.2 million on further studies, particularly focusing on project enablers, such as infrastructure for transportation and power supply, as well as other works to advance the Los Azules project.

In the United States at our Gold Bar Project, which promises to be our newest mine soon, we conducted, during 2016, environmental studies and other requirements to complete the permitting process for an open-pit heap leach mine. The key areas of development included an updated mine plan leading to operational improvements, completion of additional metallurgical work to confirm the previous gold recovery assumptions and the awarding of the contract for detailed design to M3 Engineering, who are a leading engineering and infrastructure firm based in Arizona.

All together in 2016, we spent $2.7 million on these activities for the Gold Bar Project. The draft environmental impact statement for the Gold Bar Project will be published on March 3, 2017, by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management in the U.S. federal register. Following the publication, the 45-day public comment period will end on April 17. Both the BLM and McEwen Mining will address public comments received prior to the approval of the final environmental impact study and the awarding of a record of decision enabling us to proceed with the project. Looking forward to receiving a favorable decision, we have planned to continue with the permitting process and to initiate early-stage construction during the fourth quarter of 2017. In the -- the planned production outlook from the Gold Bar mine is an average of 49,300 ounces of gold per year over its 7-year mine life. We believe that with the purchase of the Gold Bar south exploration property, we'll be able to further extend the mine life. Cash costs and all-in sustaining costs of production for the Gold Bar mine are forecasted at $728 and $995 per ounce of gold, respectively.

In terms of exploration, our main focus at this time is the El Gallo district. And there, our focus is transitioning from having been looking in the past at the majority of the deposits that could offer outside gold and silver mineralization targets into more complex ore body modeling, which we're looking primarily at 3 different styles that appear promising in the area, largely containing sulfides. This new target outlook is coherent with what we see at El Gallo Silver and the deep proportions of the ore bodies being mined now and some other mineral occurrences in and around the district, as well as historical production of gold, silver and copper from the district, always being sourced from sulfides. Our exploration program is aimed at delivering new ore feed and production to extend the life of the current operations at the El Gallo complex and also generating new opportunities for the company.

Thank you very much. Turning it over back to you, Rob.

Thank you, Xavier. Recently, we announced a proposal for a friendly acquisition of Lexam VG Gold. We anticipate that the Lexam shareholders will be voting on this offer in April. And the attraction of Lexam to us is that its assets will provide us with several high-grade advanced development projects in Timmins, Canada, which is one of the world's greatest gold districts. This acquisition is one of many steps we envision going forward in order to achieve our (inaudible) goal of becoming part of the S&P 500. We continue to look for opportunities to build our resources, production and earnings in order to achieve this goal.

And I would like, now, to ask the operator to open the call for questions.

(Operator Instructions) And our first question comes from [Stewart Bailey] with [Bailey & Company].

My name is [Stewart Bailey], and 4 or 5 years ago, the former President, Ian Ball, ordered a ball mill for the El Gallo Silver project and prepaid $10 million for it. Where is that located? Is it still at the manufacturer? Or is it on the site?

Thanks for the question, [Stewart]. The ball mill is sitting in a warehouse, right now. We didn't -- it wasn't a $10 million order, it was a $5 million order. And we are looking to utilize it either at El Gallo, and we have had some offers recently to purchase it.

Okay. Can I ask another question?

Please.

One comment, a couple of years ago, I looked at the numbers on your sales of your silver and gold, and they were quite a bit below the current market value of the daily spot price on the COMEX. And I just want to comment that you said you'd improve and you did, you're only 0.8% below, which seems appropriate. So congratulations, you've followed through on another one of your promises.

Thank you, [Stewart]. Appreciate it. In the past, we were timing some sales, and some sales were beyond our control with our partner, Hochschild Mining.

Right. Hey, I've got 1 more question for you. I noticed your investment in Golden Predator, and I went on the website and they show that your fully diluted position in that company is about 11%, if you exercised all of your warrants. That worked out the other day to about $20 million. Now is that included in the $55 million?

I can answer that for you, [Stewart]. We do not include any value for the warrants, I believe. It's just the investments in the shares.

Why not? They are (inaudible)?

Just a degree of conservatism.

Okay. But you do agree it was at one time worth $20 million?

Yes, yes.

All right, I've been a longtime shareholder. I've got stock at $5.50 I'm still holding to try to get even, but I've also bought some at $0.90, so I'm not unhappy.

Our next question comes from [Michael Riley], private investor.

It's my belief that twice McEwen stock has been attacked by aggressive short sellers with price-smashing results. And so my question is, in the future, will MUX management defend the stock price against aggressive short sellers?

It's difficult to get on top of short a position. We've tried to combat it with delivering results. It's -- we've looked into it before and found it hard to discern who are the short sellers. So I'm not sure of a strategy for dealing with the attacks other than being very forthright in what we're doing and delivering on what we've said we're going to do. If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to entertain them.

Okay. I just want to thank you for the share repurchase program and considering enlarging the share repurchase program.

Our next question is from Howard Flinker with Flinker & Company.

Do you have any more geological details about Lexam yet? I mean what you're paying, and what you're getting and all that stuff?

You could go to the Lexam website. We're not really able to provide a lot while we are making this proposal. So it's all published.

I neglected to do that, I'll do that. Second, and then a comment. When are you going to submit your full financials to SEDAR, roughly?

You should see them on SEDAR now. They were on EDGAR as soon as we filed yesterday in the afternoon.

Again, I neglected to check. And finally, as to short sellers, 2 parts to the advice come, one from (inaudible), who I believe was Napoleon's Finance Minister. You develop your business and the short sellers will get carried out by themselves. And in the meantime, if anybody advises you to consider any action against short selling, I'm not short of course, it distracts you from building your business. Just focus on your business, the rest will take care of itself.

(Operator Instructions) And our next question is from [Mark Leaner], private investor.

I have a couple of questions, if I may. On a more macro level, you had predictions about the price of gold would be much higher in a year or a couple of years from now. Could you talk a little bit more about what your projections are with the price of gold in view of the fact that the Federal Reserve will probably raise interest rates 2 or 3x this year and the price of the dollar may continue to increase? So that's a general question about the issue of gold? And then (inaudible) McEwen Mining, my question is, you said the Lexam acquisition is one of many steps to reach the long-term goal of [earning] S&P 500. Is it possible for you to tell us what are some of the other steps you might be planning to reach that? And what year do you think you'll be able to reach that goal?

Okay. Let's start with gold. The market has been trending up since the election despite an improving price of the dollar. There seems to be a dawning in the market, an appreciation that the spending that is being proposed on defense and infrastructure is going to be large, that the unemployment rate is low and there is a reasonable chance that inflation is going to rear its head and become more evident in the not-too-distant future. And that's why you have this parallel course appearing in the metal and the dollar. I think with the interest rate increases, you're going to see people around the world putting money towards the dollar, but they'll also be starting to put more money into hard assets such as gold, silver. But we are certainly bouncing around a lot. There is a lot of volatility, but the trend appears higher for gold. And I feel that we're going to see significantly higher gold prices in the next several years. [I've tried] prices recently, and I haven't seen it materialize. So I'll just leave the [case it's] going higher, and most of my investments are in gold. So at least I'm putting my money where my mouth is. In terms of Lexam being one of many steps, we've been looking for partners where we could accelerate our advancing towards the goal of getting into the S&P 500. And some people might not realize why we are going there. But the S&P 500 has one gold stock in it and that's Newmont. There is another way of getting gold through the S&P and that's by buying shares of Freeport, which is primarily a copper producer with gold. But there is an enormous amount of money, measured in trillions of dollars, that is invested by index funds directly in the S&P 500. And I feel that this -- the weighting of gold in portfolios is going to be increasing as the price of gold goes up. And 80% of the value of markets in America are contained in the S&P 500 stocks, and 99% of the precious metal companies in the world are ineligible of getting into the S&P 500 by virtue of where they are incorporated. They're not American companies. Right now, there are only 3 companies with market caps over $1 billion, I think they're still above $1 billion, where there is Coeur, Hecla and ourselves, and the field is very small and what you get is a more stable shareholder base, lower cost of capital and provides an engine for growth -- a low-cost engine for growth. So where are we looking? We're looking through the Americas, parts of Europe. We're looking for situations where you don't have to pay top dollar for the asset, but that putting ourselves with someone else will create more value just by the combination. So those are the steps and it's -- I think, today, more than ever before, we're in a much better position to do it. Last -- in 2015, our share price was very weak. '16, we improved. We have more cash today, we don't have any debt. So we have a clean balance sheet and a diversified asset base that I think is attractive to a number of companies. And that's -- we want to just add to that asset base and build value under it, so not only are we increasing our production and our resources, but we're increasing our profit on a per-share basis rather than just in an aggregate number.

All right. What is the criteria to get into the S&P 500?

You need a $5 billion market cap. You need to be an American incorporated company. You need to have certain trading volumes. You have to have at least four consecutive quarters of earnings, and there are a couple of other requirements. In total, there are 7. But the biggest hurdle is, for us, is a 7 billion -- or the $5 billion CapEx -- market cap.

All right. The last question is, for the year 2017, do you anticipate any need for more equity financing to raise the money for maybe -- for these acquisitions, for your plan? Or will you do it through other ways?

We are very opportunistic. So we'll look for opportunities and assess what capital we may or may not need.

Our next question comes from [Karl Elkins], a private investor.

I want to thank the short sellers for the opportunity to buy more of McEwen Mining shares at $0.96 per share. And about the upcoming "merger acquisition", thanks to McEwen capital and some of their publications years ago, I happen to own some shares of Lexam [and] company. And my question is this: Are you going to have to recuse yourself from voting your shares? In other words, will it come up for a shareholder vote for the acquisition to the McEwen Mining shareholders?

Yes, I will, [Karl]. Just for everyone else in the line, I own 27% of Lexam. The New York Stock Exchange requires, if there is a related-party transaction, McEwen Mining can issue no more than 1% of its stock to that related party. Anything above that has to be put to the shareholders for a vote at a meeting, and if there is an excess, I would anticipate we would have a vote at our meeting, the McEwen Mining annual meeting for our shareholders to say either we like it or we don't. But there are 2 votes required for the Lexam shareholders. There is a -- I believe it's better than a 50% vote in favor by the shareholders that are called the minority, but they are excluding my shares as a vote, and then a second vote where you need to 2/3 majority of all shareholders. So that's -- sorry, it's 2/3 of that minority have to approve. And then -- a better than -- a vote of all the shareholders, again. So, yes, to answer your question...

Our next question is from [Joe Barnes], a private investor.

Yes, I have 2 questions. Assuming that the Lexam vote goes through positive, how much will that dilute the shares of MUX, of McEwen Mining? And my second question is -- I wanted to get a little more update on the Argentina mine. Are you getting any inquiries from people interested in that? Basically, I just wanted to get an update on that.

Let me first deal with Argentina. The political environment in Argentina improved significantly over the last year. The government is trying to contain inflation down there. So far, they are making limited progress, but the direction is -- it's going in the right direction. And the city of Buenos Aires there, a public union just accepted a contract for an 18% increase in wages for the year, which is considerably below where they were in the last year. So the government seems to be getting on top of their economics a bit. I'm going to expect it to improve some more. There are still big price pressures and there is some hesitancy to come into the markets. However, we have seen interest being expressed in our copper project. But as far as our San Jose mine, neither ourselves or Hochschild have been sellers. There haven't been any offers recently. So I guess it's easy to be that stance where you're not a seller, if there are no offers. Goldcorp is just below us and they're building their production. They had a rough start, but they're moving forward. Maybe 1 day, if the government -- there also is a government by-election coming up in October, and the current government doesn't have a clear majority. So I think there is some caution amongst investors whether they want to commit before that election result is known.

And over to the dilutions. On the time of announcements, it was calculated that it would -- McEwen Mining would issue just under 13 million shares for the acquisition of Lexam, which is just about 4%. So depending on the final outcome, it will still remain less than 5% of the current capital of McEwen Mining.

Okay. The copper mine, what you're saying is people are not willing right now to consider a possible purchase of that. But what about your plans as far as developing the mine yourself? That was a possibility.

Yes. We're going -- we've been doing studies on it from not only just what type of process we'd use, but we've also looked at the infrastructure that we need to put in place, roads coming in, power. Where would we ship the product that we produce? Would it be out through Argentina? Out through Chile? And a lot of work has been done in that regard. And we've looked at the process. With the removal of the export taxes in Argentina, which was a very large plus for the operation, we're able to envision a different processing plant that significantly reduced the CapEx, at least in a model. And we're looking at whether we should stage the development. The capital required to develop it is well beyond our treasury in terms of being able to finance it in our current state. But with the right economics and the copper price improving, it is a possibility. But at the moment, we're looking more for a joint venture of that asset.

You're looking more for a joint venture than you are for potential sale of the mine? Is that it?

Well it could be a sale as well, but I was just -- it all depends on price.

Our next question is from [Robert Casnovich] from [Wings for the World].

Okay, last meeting, annual general luncheon meeting, I asked you about the property that we have in Mexico for silver, and you mentioned that you would like to start working when silver price goes higher. Are you planning in this stage or higher, say, over $20, over $25?

We've been maintaining for a while that we needed better than a $21 silver price before we want to put a shovel in the ground. When we last spoke, we were looking at having a central location at -- by the deposit of El Gallo Silver, and then we had a satellite deposit called Palmarito. Subsequent to our conversation, we've done exploration and found satellite deposits that might be better served being developed at a Palmarito site than at the El Gallo with shorter haul distances and greater ease at building a facility. So the price still is at $21. The form of the development is changing as we speak, and by mid-year, we'll have -- be able to share with you our plans there. I'm encouraged by the silver price going up right now. Still top of our list for our development projects.

And our next question is from [Ralph Winger] with [Winger Investment].

I've agreed with everything we talked about. I've been with you way back since you had our first meeting and [then for] annual meeting at one time. The question I have is the Lexam is a good move in the right direction, but since the gold/silver ratio is so far out of line, and I am a believer who is looking at all of the data, we are moving closer to, maybe, a 20:1 or something like that. So the question I have is why not be somewhat more aggressive on the silver acquisitions while they're still very cheap at these levels, all right? A lot of guys are barely at breakeven. And I would say there must be some properties out there, or some companies that would love to combine with us and as a result, we move ahead in 2, 3 years earlier on the [New York] than what now seems likely. Any thoughts on that? I think we talked about it one time 2 years ago.

I agree with you. The ratio does seem quite out of line. And the Lexam transaction, let's call it convenient. Whenever you're buying a company, even though you might do a lot of due diligence, there always seems to be surprises. In the Lexam case, it's an affiliated company that we've known for quite a while and actually done the accounting for. So we had firsthand knowledge of it and felt that it was a good tuck-in at this point. Looking outside, we're looking at both gold and silver. And if the right opportunity comes up -- I take your point that a lot of the silver producers are hanging on. And -- but I just want to assure you, we're looking at both of them, both types of ore. And I couldn't agree more with you. I think there is going to be a swing in that ratio.

One other comment, in a way. I've seen a lot of people moving into the Yukon. You have some minor -- the company has some minor interest in some companies in the Yukon, or at least the Northern BC/Yukon. Any thoughts about how you see it up there?

The Yukon, most of our exposure has been on gold, but there is silver as well, base metals. But the Yukon is becoming a very hot area, right now. I mean it was long ago, but people have found new areas of mineralization. I think it's an area one should be watching very closely and, as you said, we have some exposure up there already, and it gives us a good listening post for what's going on and possibly for opportunities.

I mean, obviously, with the 3 majors having moved into the Yukon, you know that this will finally emerge, maybe, in the next few years.

At this time, I'm showing no further questions. I would like to turn the call back over to Mr. Rob McEwen for closing remarks.

Thank you, operator. I just wanted to ask everybody to remember that gold is money. It's going higher, so is the price of silver. And I wish you well in your investments. Thank you for being a shareholder.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today's conference. This does conclude the program and you may now disconnect. Everyone, have a good day.