Hello everyone and thank you for joining us on today's full Royal Gold 2025 full year and fourth quarter conference call. During today's call we will have a Q&A session. If you would like to ask a question during that time please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad and to withdraw your question it's star followed by two.

With that it's my pleasure to hand over to Alistair Baker to begin please go ahead when you're ready thank you operator good morning and welcome to our discussion of Royal Gold's fourth quarter and year-end 2025 results this event is being webcast live and a replay of this call will be available on our website speaking on the call today are Bill Heisenbuttel president and CEO Paul Lindner senior vice president and CFO and Martin Raffield senior vice president of operations other members of the management team are also available for questions. During today's call, we will make forward-looking statements, including statements and other projections and expectations for the future. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from these statements. These risks and uncertainties are discussed in yesterday's press release and our filings with the SEC. We will also refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures, including adjusted net income, adjusted net income per share, adjusted EBITDA, and cash G&A. Reconciliations of these measures to the most directly comparable gap measures are available in yesterday's press release, which can be found on our website. Bill will start with an overview of 2025 performance. Martin will provide portfolio commentary, and Paul will give a financial update on the quarter. After the formal remarks, we'll open the lines for a Q&A session. I'll now turn the call over to Bill.

Good morning, and thank you for joining the call. I'll begin on slide four. 2025 was a transformational year for Royal Gold. We set records for revenue, operating cash flow, and earnings, and completed some material acquisitions that set us up very well for the current strong gold price environment and over the longer term. We also had developments within our portfolio that add significant value to some of our largest assets. For the full year, revenue was $1 billion, operating cash flow was $705 million, and earnings were $466 million. These were increases of 43%, 33%, and 40%, respectively, over 2024. After adjusting for unusual items throughout the year, net income was a record $510 million, a 47% increase over 2024. We are a gold-focused company, and gold contributed 78% of total revenue for the year. The strong gold price combined with our low and stable cash G&A allowed us to maintain an adjusted EBITDA margin of 82% for the year. During the year, we paid over $118 million to shareholders in dividends and raised our annual dividend to $1.90 per share for 2026. This is the 25th consecutive annual dividend increase, which is an unmatched record in the precious metals industry. Since our first dividend in 2000, we have returned approximately $1.2 billion to shareholders. We were very active during the year and made several meaningful acquisitions. We acquired Sandstorm Gold and Horizon Copper, which allowed us to meaningfully grow and diversify our portfolio. We now have the largest and most diversified portfolio of mining assets in our sector. We acquired a gold stream on the producing Consanti mine from First Quantum, which adds another large, long life and cash flowing asset to the portfolio. And we acquired a gold stream and royalty on the Warenta development project, increased our exposure to the Zavantina mine, and added a further royalty interest on the Lawyer's Ranch project. Our portfolio performed well during the year, and we achieved full repayment of the advanced stream deposits on a rainy river, Guadalupe Viejo, and Andacoyo mines. We acquired these interests in 2015 and each remains an important contributor to the portfolio. We also saw some very positive news from within the portfolio with the life of mine extension at Mount Milligan, the recently approved expansion at Comacao, and significant exploration success at Four Mile. And finally, we got off to a quick start on rationalizing and simplifying the Sandstorm and Common Horizon portfolios. The integration of these portfolios is largely complete and we're looking forward to further daylighting the value in those portfolios. Paul will discuss the fourth quarter in more detail, but I'd like to comment that there were several unusual financial items last year, and in particular this last quarter, that were one time in nature and related to this acquisition activity. We started 2026 with these items behind us and we are hosting an investor day on March 31st to put our 2025 activity into context, provide 2026 guidance and give directions on how we see growth over the longer term. Turning to slide five, we performed well in 2025 compared to guidance. Our annual guidance was issued in March 2025 based on the interest in our portfolio at that time. We didn't update guidance during the year to include the impacts of the Sandstorm, Horizon or Consanci acquisitions, and we likewise didn't include the impacts of these acquisitions in the comparison of actual results to our guidance rangers compared to the guidance ranges for the year before the new acquisitions all categories were within the guidance range except for revenue from other metals which exceeded the high end of that range I'll now turn the call over to Martin to discuss portfolio performance in the fourth quarter thanks Bill turning to slide six portfolio performance was solid for the quarter.

Volume was 90,800 GEOs with record revenue of $375 million, which included new revenue of $32 million from Consanchi and $49 million from Sandstorm Horizon. We closed the Sandstorm Horizon transaction on October 20th, so the revenue from these interests does not reflect a full quarter. Royalty revenue was up by 42% from the prior year quarter to $111 million. We saw very strong revenue from the Cortez CC Zone in Penasquito, partially offset by weaker revenue from the Cortez Legacy Zone. Revenue from our stream segment was $265 million, up over 110% from the same period last year. We saw higher contributions from all our stream interests with materially higher sales from Pueblo Viejo and Acoyo Rainy River in Mount Milligan. I'm now to enter slide 7 and give some high-level commentary on notable developments within the portfolio in the last quarter. The portfolio has grown to include interest on about 80 producing and 30 development assets, and we've changed our disclosure this quarter to group our interests on a regional basis and break out the revenue for the largest interest. This should help you track our most material revenue drivers. The Nal Milligan Centre reported it continues to progress engineering and studies to support permitting for the life of mine extension to 2045. At Pueblo Viejo, Barrick reported continued progress on the life of mine extension with a focus on housing and resettlement and the engineering and permitting for the new tailing Barrack also reported guidance for its share of gold production of 350 to 400,000 ounces in 2026. At Cortez, Barrack reported continued exploration success at Formile, with the extension of the Dorothy Zone and identification of new mineralization below the Mill Canyon stock and down dip of the Charlie area. Barrack also reported 2026 production guidance for the Cortez complex of approximately 700 to 780,000 ounces on a 100% basis. Our royalties overlap at Cortez, and we expect an average blended royalty rate of 3.5% to 4% over this production in 2026, versus 2.6% in 2025. At Avancina, IRO filed an updated technical report showing a four-year extension for the life of mine to 2032. Euro expects 2026 gold production to range between 40,000 and 50,000 ounces. Euro further disclosed that it sold approximately 15,000 ounces of gold and gold concentrate in the fourth quarter, and it expects concentrate sales to continue through mid-2027. The sale of gold and gold concentrate is not included in their guidance. At Frida del Norte, Lundin Gold reported continued exploration success, and recent drilling continues to advance the understanding of the emerging porphyry belt adjacent to the mine. London has identified a large intrusive complex hosting several shallow copper-gold porphyry systems within a short distance of each other, and the newest discovery extends the porphyry corridor to at least 10 kilometers in length. At Mara, Glencore reported that feasibility study work is ongoing with a final investment decision targeted for the second half of 2027. and first production expected from the Agua Rica deposit in 2031. At Kemsanchi we received our first stream delivery in early October and we are now receiving regular monthly deliveries. First Quantum declared commercial production at the S3 expansion in December and three-year copper production guidance that increases with the ramp up of the S3 expansion feed. Based on First Quantum's copper production guidance and production to delivery to sales timing, we expect 2026 gold sales attributable to our stream interest of 26 to 31,000 ounces, which rises to 38 to 43,000 ounces in 2028. At Comacao, MMG reported that the feasibility study for the expansion was approved by the board, and production of concentrated is expected in the first half of 2028. MMG is targeting annual silver production of 4 to 4.5 million ounces, and we expect our share to be about 60% of this level. We expect silver production to our account of 1.45 to 1.55 million ounces in 2026. Recall that our stream has a 90% payable factor applicable to this production. At Platt Reef, Ivanhoe Mines reported that development continues on schedule. The first sale of concentrate from phase one was completed late in the fourth quarter and the phase two expansion is targeted for completion in the fourth quarter of 2027. We expect to see first revenue from Platte Reef in the first half of 2026. And finally, at Hod Madden, SSR announced the results of a feasibility study for a 10-year life of mine with annual average production of 159,000 ounces of gold and 21 million pounds of copper and a development capital cost of 910 million dollars. I'll now turn the call over to Paul.

Thanks Martin. I'll turn to slide 8 and give an overview of the financial results for the quarter. For the discussion of slides 8 and 9, I'll be comparing the quarter ended December 31, 2025 to the prior year quarter. Revenue for the quarter was up strongly by 85 percent to 375 million dollars. As Martin noted, during the quarter we saw a combined new revenue of about $82 million from the Consanxi Gold Stream and the Sandstorm Horizon interest. Metal prices were also a major driver of the revenue increase, with gold up 55%, silver up 74%, and copper up 21% over the prior year. Gold remains our dominant revenue driver, making up 78% of total revenue for the quarter, followed by silver at 11% and copper at 8%. Royal Gold has the highest gold revenue percentage when compared to our large-cap peers in the the royalty interim sector, and we expect our revenue mix will remain consistent after the recent acquisition. To help you with your Q1 estimates, we expect first quarter 2026 GEO sales to be in line with the fourth quarter. We will provide details on 2026 revenue guidance at our investor day, but at this point we expect the first quarter sales to be the lowest of the year and not reflective of the full Turn to slide 9, I'll provide more detail on certain financial items for the quarter. gna expense was 17.6 million dollars which is approximately nine million dollars higher than the prior year the higher gna expenses period was mostly due to higher corporate costs related to integration activities associated with the sandstorm and horizon copper acquisition these integration costs were nearly four and a half million dollars and many of these costs are largely one time in nature and are not expected to be recurring employee related costs which also includes non-cash stop compensation were three million dollars higher during the quarter. Like the integration-related costs, much of these additional employee costs this quarter are not expected in future periods. Moving forward, we are estimating our 2026 total G&A expense to range between $50 million and $60 million. This estimate reflects some of the cost energy savings we expected when we announced the Sandstorm and Horizon Copper acquisition. Our G&A expense increased to $80 million from $34 million in the prior year. On a unit basis, this expense was of $881 per GEO for the quarter compared to $444 per GEO last year. The higher overall expense was primarily due to $33 million in additional depletion attributable to the producing interest acquired from Sandstorm and $13 million in additional depletion from the new Constantinople Goldstream. Depletion expense and depletion rates for the producing Sandstorm interest are higher than historical amounts reported by Sandstorm. This is primarily due to an increase in the carrying values of these interests, which were stepped up as part of purchase accounting rules under U.S. GAAPS. Excluding the additional depletion as part of the Sandstorm interest and the new consistency stream, our 2025 DD&A expense was within guidance range we provided earlier in 2025. We will provide more detail on 2026 DD&A expectations when we provide 2026 guidance at our upcoming investor day. Costs related to the Sandstorm Horizon copper acquisition were $14 million for the quarter. We highlighted these costs on our last conference call, and these costs are attributable to financial, advisory, legal, accounting, tax, and consulting services specific to the acquisition. Again, these costs are one-time in nature, and we do not expect much, if any, of these costs beyond this quarter. As we announced in November, we sold all of the VersaMet royalty common shares that we acquired with Sandstorm. The sale resulted in a one-time loss of approximately $48 million during the quarter. The loss is due to the difference between the sale price of Canadian dollar $8.75 per share and the fair market value of the shares on the date we acquired Sandstorm, which was Canadian dollar $11.60 per share. We view the value of this share position at Canadian dollar $5.20 per share on the date of the Sandstorm transaction announcement in July. So while we recognize an accounting loss, we sold the position at a price that was 68% higher than our original valuation. Interest and other expense increased to $17.7 million from $1.4 million in the prior period, due primarily to higher average amounts outstanding under the revolving credit facility in the current quarter. Tax expense for the quarter was $53 million, resulting in an effective tax rate of 36 percent compared to tax expense of $26 million in the prior year. The higher income tax expense is primarily attributable to higher pre-tax income and one-time acquisition-related tax items. Absent the unusual and non-recurring items, our effective tax rate for the quarter was approximately 22.5%. Our annual effective tax rate for 2025 was 17.8%, and within the guidance range we provided earlier. We will provide more detail on the expectations of our effective tax rate when we give our 2026 guidance. Net income for the quarter was $94 million, or $1.16 per share, which compares to $107 million, or $1.63 per share, in the prior year. The decrease in net income was largely due to the one-time loss on the sale of the versement shares and the one-time cost related to the Sandstorm Horizon Copper Acquisition I just outlined. After adjusting for these items, adjusted net income was $155 million, or $1.92 per share. Finally, our operating cash flow this quarter was a record $242 million, up significantly from $141 million in the prior period. The increase was primarily due to higher stream and royalty revenue and proceeds from the first delivery of deferred gold for the Mt. Milligan Cost Support Agreement. These increases were partially offset by the higher acquisition-related costs I mentioned earlier. In summary, it was a solid operating quarter, but with some unusual items related to the Sandstorm and Horizon Copper acquisition that impacted our financial results. As much of the Sandstorm and Horizon Copper acquisition-related noise is behind us, I am anticipating that we will return to a steadier state beginning with our first quarter results. I'll turn to slide 10 for a summary of recent changes to our outstanding debt. As discussed in our last conference call, we drew an additional $450 million on the credit facility on October 10th for the closing of the Sandstorm and Horizon Copper transaction, which resulted in a debt balance of $1.225 billion. Since October, we have made a significant process paying down our debt. We ended the year with outstanding debt of $900 million, and with further repayments in early 2026, we have reduced our outstanding balance to $725 million and now have $675 million available under the revolver. New growth within the portfolio, strong metal prices, and the proceeds received from the Verstimate share sale have helped us reduce our debt faster than we originally expected. Based on current metal prices and absent further significant acquisitions, we now expect to fully repaid the balance in early 2027, earlier than our previous forecast of mid-2027. I will end on slide 11 and summarize our financial position. At the end of December, we had total available liquidity of $757 million between the available amounts on the revolver and $257 million of working capital. With respect to further financial commitments, $100 million of funding outstanding for the warrants acquisition. We expect to fund the remaining commitment in two tranches of $50 million this year, with the first tranche expected in the first quarter and the second in May. Although we will work to convert the Hog-Madden Joint Venture interest into another investment structure, we plan to continue to fund our share of project costs during the year in order to maintain our 30% ownership interest. That concludes my comments on our financial performance for the quarter, and I'll now turn the call back to Bill for posing comments.

Thanks, Paul. 2025 was a very active year for us, and this quarter had a lot of unusual items related to that activity and introduced significant noise into the results. These one-time items are now behind us. Our underlying portfolio is performing well, and after a record year in 2025, we're starting 2026 from a position of strength. Royal Gold has the most diversified and gold-focused portfolio amongst our large-cap peers. We believe we're positioned as a premier company in our sector. We are looking forward to sharing our vision of the future at our upcoming investor day. Operator, that concludes our prepared remarks. I'll now open the line for questions.

Thank you. We'll now begin today's Q&A session. If you would like to ask a question on today's call, please press start followed by one on your telephone keypad. And to withdraw your question, it starts followed by two. Our first question comes from Fahad Tariq from Jefferies. Your line's now open. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. Can you provide maybe some color on what the deal pipeline looks like right now? We're hearing from one of your competitors that because of the maybe potentially larger copper builds that are coming, there could be significant byproduct streams available as part of the financing strategy.

So just curious what you think in terms of the deal pipeline and thoughts around bigger copper projects yeah thanks very much for the question I might see if I can get Dan Breeze on the line who runs our our business development just to give you he can give you a sense for what he's seeing yeah thanks Bill happy to give you a bit of color on what we're seeing and obviously 2025 was was a great year for us a great year for the industry and I think what we're seeing is is more the same in terms of of our pipeline that looks looks pretty strong at moment. I think one of the things that we've noticed is the market's been pretty volatile looking at the commodity prices, but it just doesn't seem to be slowing down the activity. I mean, we've seen a number of deals announced this year already. So I'd say, I think the framework of what we're seeing in terms of actual deals, it's very much like what we've seen announced year to date. So third party royalties, great market to sell those into. And then your specific comment around the base metal producers and looking to surface value by selling non-core precious exposure. I think that's fair to say. Obviously, the BHP Wheaton deal this week, but you look back at our transactions last year at Consanchi and Warenza, they fit that category as well. And that's really where our product works extremely well. It works for both the seller and buyer. So I think that's a fair comment. I think it's a good market to consider that from a base metal producer perspective. And then we're also seeing development opportunities over projects on primary gold assets as well. So overall, it's a good, it looks like it's going to be a good market for us going forward into 2026.

Does that help you? Great. Good question. Yeah, that's great. Yeah, that's great. Thanks so much. Okay.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Cosmos Chai from CIBC. Your line is now open. Please go ahead with your question.

Thanks, Bill and team. Maybe my first question is on Hamadan. As you mentioned, you know, SSR Mining had recently put out a new technical report on the asset as the operator. Were you happy with those numbers? And then secondly, are you happy with the timeline that they've kind of put out there, knowing that a construction decision has yet to be made? And when I ask SSR Mining, it sounds like they're trying to involve all parties involved to make a final decision. So on that front, is World Gold actively involved in terms of any discussions, in terms of a go-ahead decision? And then lastly, you know, as a royalty company, what's your long-term strategy here at Hamadan? Right now, you're a joint venture partner. You need to contribute CapEx into it. Ultimately, you're looking to convert that into some kind of royalty, some kind of stream. So, sorry, multi-part, but I'm sure you can answer all my questions.

There are a lot of pieces to the questions. Let me see if I can cover off. Answer the piece that you want to answer, Bill. Were we happy with the technical study? Yeah, we were. You know, we knew when we were doing the due diligence on Sandstormer Horizon, we knew the capital costs were higher. That was part of the due diligence, so it wasn't a surprise. You look at the IRRs, it's an outstanding gold project. I mean, if we were in the business of being an operating partner, it would certainly be one I think we'd want to hang on to. So yes, happy with the technical report. You know, a construction decision, I think our approach might be a little bit different than an operating company. If the construction decision gets put off a little bit, that gives us a little more time before there's heavy spending to work on what we might ultimately try to convert this into. So a delay here is not all that bad. And I think Rod was talking about two and a half to three, two to three years until production. You know, that's fine. We're not saying to investors we're going to deliver hot, modern ounces in a certain period of time. So that's not an issue. But we are a venture partner. So, yes, we are involved in discussions with SSR on the technical report, on development strategy, on spending. You know, right now we're proceeding as though we are a joint venture partner, and we're taking that responsibility. And then I think the last part of your question was the strategy. I think we've been pretty clear we would like to turn it into something that looks a little more familiar, year, where we don't have the overrun risk, the operating cost risk. But that's going to take some time. And as you can well imagine, SSR has been busy with the technical reports and busy with the press release, working on the partners trying to move forward to a construction decision. So I think that to the extent we're able to do it, I think it plays out over the course of the rest of this year. That's great.

Maybe moving on to another stream or option that you acquired from Sandstorm Mara. You know, it's in Argentina. Certainly, Argentina is looking much better now in terms of supporting mining. This is an option to convert into a 20% gold stream eventually. So, could you maybe talk about the mechanics behind that potential conversion? What, you know, needs to happen and potential timing here? and the payment that you need to make?

Yeah, so I think we've got a very small royalty as it is, and what we're able to do is basically forego that royalty and convert it into the stream we have to spend. I believe it's $225 million. It could be off there a little bit over the course of whatever the construction period is to earn that gold stream. You know, the economics of how that investment was calculated was formulaic with a cap. And I think if you didn't have the cap, the formula would result in a much larger investment. So, economically, we have every incentive to invest that money to turn the small royalty into a meaningful Gulfstream. Great.

And then maybe one last question. Looking back, as you mentioned, 2025, you hit all your different guidances for commodity, but you also exceeded in other metals. Could you maybe talk about, you know, some of the details behind how you exceeded? I think it came in at $25 million. Guidance was $18 to $21 million in terms of revenue. What drove that outperformance? Is that sustainable? Should we expect that to be factored into how you guide other metals for 2026?

I may turn this over to Paul. Paul, I believe the excess was primarily due to metal price. But correct me if I'm wrong there.

That is largely the case, Bill. And if you want more specifics, I may only add to that. Martin, if you also have further information or details, you can provide there. But largely was metal price.

Great. Thanks, Bill, Paul, and team for answering all my questions. That's all I have. Thank you.

As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question on today's call, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. And to withdraw your question, it's star followed by two. Our next question comes from Derek Ma from TD Cohen. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Thank you. I wanted to ask about Pebble Viejo, the Silver Stream there. Barrett seems to be making progress from the tailing situation perspective, and I recognize there isn't much detail on the silver side. But conceptually, because of the size of the silver stream and the deferred ounces, is there a lack of incentive for the operator to prioritize silver here? And what can Royal Gold do to kind of pull that forward?

You know, a lack of incentive? I don't think so. You know, if you just break down the math, so it's a 75% silver stream, but we pay a 30% cash price. So, if you take 70% of 75%, you're basically splitting the economics almost in half, and it only covers 60% of the project. So, you know, when you do that math, Newmont actually has a 40% interest in the silver, and we and Barrick sort of have around a 30% interest. So, I don't think there's a lack of incentive to do that, And I would also think that the entity that has 100% interest in economically in the silver is probably the DR government that gets royalties and taxes on it. So, you know, I don't think – we don't get the sense – we go to site every year. I don't get the sense that Barrick is just sitting on solutions because they don't see the economic benefit as a whole.

That's clear. Thank you for that. And then in terms of the royalty revenue, it's a bit lower than my expectations, at least for Q4. Why doesn't Royal Gold provide preliminary royalty, sorry, royalty revenue expectations on that side of the business? Is it a matter of information right to get on some of these assets? Because some of your peers do put out preliminary revenue and deals inclusive of the royalty assets.

Yeah, and I'm actually surprised they're able to do it, to be honest with you, just given, maybe it is just information rights. But, Paul, maybe you can just walk through when we tend to get information from the end of a quarter or a year to when we put out financials. What happens is we sort of find operators reporting over a period of time, and we don't necessarily have an expectation of what it's going to be.

But, I don't know, Paul, can you give a little more detail there? Sure, yeah. So, Derek, on the information rights, yeah, largely a lot of the royalties that we have, we're not entitled to a lot of the information until, you know, 15 to 30 to sometimes 45 days after the respective month end or quarter end. So, because of that, it's difficult for us to put together, you know, that with, you know, a good estimate there. Now, I would point to, too, that we, you know, have historically provided our stream sales guidance on a quarterly basis. And if you look back at just history of the two segments between streams and royalties, roughly 70% is streams and, you know, 30% is royalty revenue on average. So that could be another measuring stick for you if, you know, if that's helpful. But just, yeah, I think going back to just a lot of the information rights that we have, you know, we do look at the revenue over the course of a year and kind of with expectations, but just not having that firm, you know, kind of paper in hand to help with that, you probably wouldn't help with, you know, estimation. So I probably would point you back to that stream release that we put out and then just thinking to the 70-30% split.

Thank you for that. But, yeah, it might be a bit of Cortez, and it's always a bit tricky to model that one. That kind of throws a wrench in our estimates, but understood. Maybe one last question. Your comment on Q1, Paul, you mentioned flat sales quarter-over-quarter. That's metal sales, right, not revenue? Got it.

Thanks, Eric.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Tanya. Tanya, Jessica, from Scotiabank. Your line is now open. please go ahead. Can anybody hear me? Tanya?

Yeah, your lines are open, please go ahead. Great, thank you so much for that. Okay, sorry, I just want to make sure I understood, so the Q1 guidance on the GEO sales, you said that's only the metals portion?

Sorry, Tanya, could you just repeat that? Are you asking if it's only on the stream side or or we're talking about sort of total GEOs.

Okay, so you're talking total GEOs for Q1 is going to be similar to Q4 of 25, and it's going to be the lowest of your 2026 number.

That's our estimate, yeah.

Okay, got it. Sorry, I just wanted to clarify that, that it wasn't just the streaming portion of it, and then I heard metals, and I'm like, I wasn't sure what it was. Okay, I got it. Maybe I could just go back to Pueblo Viejo again. You know, Barrick indicated on their conference call that, like, they're not going to get to the gold recovery that they were anticipating. Never mentioned anything on silver, so I'm just kind of wondering, and a new technical report will be out shortly, I guess we can wait for that as well, but, you know, how much work is being done on this silver? I mean, you know, obviously focus has been on this gold and I understand that. Is there any concern that we may not get to what the silver recovery could be as well?

Yeah. Tanya, what I might do is just ask Martin to hop on here and just give you a little background or sense of what they've been working on recently, yeah, just give you as much background as we have.

For sure.

Yeah, thanks, Bill, Tanya. So over the past year, what we've seen is that BRIC have really focused at Pueblo Viejo on improving the throughput, and they've made great strides towards that, and towards the end of the year, we saw it coming up to the levels that they were expecting, and we expect that to continue going forward. So we think that they, from a throughput point of view, they're going to be fairly consistent going forward. We don't in the short term expect any material change to silver recovery. And you pointed out that gold recovery expectations are lower long term and that they are working on those. So really those recovery issues are related to the type of feed that they're putting in at the moment. They're putting a lot of the old stockpile material in. That stockpile is highly weathered and it's highly variable, probably more variable than they expected when they put the expansion plan in place. And that weathering is affecting their flotation and autoclave plans. I'm not really able at the moment to comment specifically on silver recovery going forward. I think, as you pointed out, we'll wait for that technical report to come out in March. What I will say is that they are highly focused on both gold and silver recovery. We spend quite a bit of time during the year at-site visits, talking to the operating team on-site, talking to the corporate team, and we're very happy with the amount of effort they're putting into it in order to improve both gold and silver recovery but the tech report comes out and that'll give us more information on the future of the operation now I appreciate these stockpiles but the stockpiles are going to be part of the ORFI for the next five years so just they're there so we got to deal with it okay we'll wait for the technical study hopefully we'll

have more guidance there and maybe I'll move on to the yeah the transaction environment appreciate you going through what's available out there just a couple of things I wanted to get an understanding of number one are you still in that you know you've got about 700 million of available liquidity to to use for transactions, are you still focused in that $100 to $500 million range, or what are you focused, or what are you seeing, or could you see yourself doing those multi-billion dollar transactions, given your focus on debt reduction as well?

Well, just in terms of capital allocation, I would still always say that if we can find good investments. That's the best use of the capital. And if we stopped repaying debt or even borrowed more to fund the right transaction, that would be a priority. So we are not prioritizing debt repayment over new investments. As far as the transaction size, I think it has reverted to what we've seen historically. I think 100 to 500 is a good estimate. As you can imagine, with metal prices where they are every GEO we buy is going to be more expensive so you know when we refer to a hundred to three hundred might be two hundred to five hundred at this point for the same number of CEOs but yeah so that's that's really in terms of the size of investment that's the that's the range that we are seeing and we are still actively looking okay and then and then my other second part of that same question is I've seen some of your peers double down or go shopping in their own closet ie for assets that they already own and increase exposure there is there opportunities for you to do the same oh we're always looking we have a great relationship with them I think that and Tina was a great example we were able to put another 50 million dollars to work at an asset that has really developed the way we thought it would but as an asset that we quite like so again that that should be fertile ground given the relationships we have and the knowledge we have of the of the assets now just thinking of some of these larger sized ones yeah yeah if you look at the larger ones yes you know if Millie gives Sentara needed excuse me some Terra needed money. I can't imagine Barrick coming to us on Pueblo Viejo. We're certainly open to that. And I think the nice thing about transactions like Antimena is if you can get a BHP to do streaming, that just opens the market to almost every mining company, including companies that were probably resistant.

So I actually see that transaction as opening the door to some other opportunities with bigger companies I agree okay well thank you so much for taking my questions thank you thank you our next question comes from Josh Wilson from RBC your lines now open please go ahead yeah thanks very much I just looking back at that first quarter production guidance that was discussed I guess you know thinking about the fourth quarter having been a partial contribution from the sandstorm assets first quarter will be a full contribution and then also there's some annual payments for some of the assets that are paid in the first quarter and then the inventories that are you know normal levels I'm wondering what is causing production really not to increase.

Thanks, Josh. I know, Martin, can I ask you from a production profile perspective? Because obviously what's happened, yeah, we have things that are going up, but there's always variability quarter to quarter. And so, Martin, I don't know if there's any color you can add there.

Yeah, I think it would, Josh, it would be around delivery timing. Some of our bigger assets from a delivery point of view fluctuate quite significantly on a quarter to quarter basis and I think I would put that lower estimate for Q1 down to delivery timing in general.

So there's no material line plan changes or seasonality worth thinking about here?

No, not at all. No, it's all around deliveries.

And maybe just along those lines, you know, given the portfolio is larger now, should we expect to see inventories build up from current levels or, you know, even with the new assets that are stream-related Etsy?

Yeah, John, I wouldn't… Go ahead, Martin.

I was hoping to leave that one to you, Bill, but I'll say no. I think our inventory levels are going to be fairly stable.

Yeah, the only color I was going to add to it, Josh, is our inventory is the product of our sales policy. And what we try to do is sell metal over the period of time between delivery. So if we expect the next delivery in 21 days, we'll sell the metal we just got over 21 It's not an inventory strategy. The inventory at the end of a quarter is just the result of what deliveries occurred and where are we in that sales cycle.

All right, those are all my questions. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Josh.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Brian McArthur from Raymond James. Your line's now open. Please proceed.

Good morning, and thank you for taking my question. There was a comment made that you're going to fund Hot Madden this year to maintain your interest, which makes sense to me. It's not significant funding this year.

If I look at the way the feasibility works, the big capital tends to be a few years out. is that right the way you look at it right now because again I think one of the things you would probably try and do is restructure this before you had to put significant capital into it because it's a different business model then yeah if we can restructure this before significant capital goes in that I agree with you that is the best thing that's the best outcome for us as far as the spending this year I you know again I think SSR is talking about a two to three-year construction period what we spend this year is going to be very much dependent on when the investment decision gets made because I think what I think what Rod talked about yesterday was spending about was 15 million a month but that would increase so if an investment decision is made in two weeks that's different than an investment decision is made in a couple months and I think once we have more clarity on that we can come back to you and say okay you know if we don't restructure this this is what the spend will be for this year I just don't know what that number is right now gives me a bit of color thank you thank you with that we have no further questions in the queue at this time so that does conclude the Q&A portion of today's call on our hand back over to Bill Heisenbuttle for closing comments well thank you for taking the time to join us today we certainly appreciate your interest and we look forward to updating you during our upcoming investor day take care Thank you all for joining.

That concludes today's call. You may now disconnect your line.