Kinross Gold Corporation
Q2 2021 Earnings Call Transcript

Published: 29 Jul 2021

[Operator:]

Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Kinross Gold Corporation Second Quarter 2021 Results Conference Call and Webcast. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Mr. Chris Lichtenheldt, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

[Chris Lichtenheldt:]

Thank you and good morning. With us today, we have Paul Rollinson, President and CEO and the Kinross senior leadership team, Andrea Freeborough, Paul Tomory and Geoff Gold.

[Paul Rollinson:]

Thanks, Chris. Thank you all for joining us today. While there continues to be challenges globally coming out of the pandemic, we are seeing signs of a return to normal across our operations. With the safety and well-being of our people as our top priority, we are maintaining our pandemic-related protocols, where needed. However, we are also benefiting from a continued return to more efficient operating practices wherever possible. Notably, with travel restrictions easing, we have been able to reach most of our sites more easily. Before turning the call over to Andrea for a financial review and Paul for an operating review, I will comment briefly on situation at Tasiast, our return of capital plan and some highlights from the quarter. We realized the fire at Tasiast created a lot of uncertainty which negatively impacted our stock price. Our objective today is to provide an update that helps remove this uncertainty. We needed the past several weeks to make mechanical inspections. And based on this, we do not believe there is any substantial damage to the integrity of the mill. As a result, we are confident that we will be operational before year end. Furthermore, our updated estimate for the cost of repair is now reduced to not more than $35 million. And importantly, the gold is still in the ground and we have an insurance claim for the damages and the interruption to our business. Therefore, we do not see a fundamental change in the value of our business. With respect to the 24k expansion, while the plant is down, we have been able to continue to mine and advance the project. We will begin 2022, which is substantially more ore and stockpile, which further secures our ability to meet our production goals in ‘22 and ‘23 and now ‘24. I was recently in Mauritania and we visited Tasiast and met with senior government officials. On July 15, we signed the final agreement, which provides enhanced certainty on the economics at Tasiast. Achieving this important milestone reinforces our strong partnership with the government. We appreciate – we are appreciative of the strong support from the government, particularly as we work through the impact of the mill fire.

[Andrea Freeborough:]

Thanks, Paul. I will begin with financial highlights from the quarter including highlights on our balance sheet then provide some commentary on our updated outlook. Production during the quarter was approximately 538,000 ounces and sales were 548,000 ounces. We generated free cash flow of $183 million during the quarter, which was an increase over $100 million from the previous quarter due largely to lower taxes paid.

[Paul Tomory:]

Thank you, Andrea. I will provide a brief update on the impacts from COVID, followed by an update on our operations, projects and exploration programs. As Paul mentioned, COVID restrictions are generally lifting around the world. And most of our operations are slowly returning to normal, with some exceptions. Thanks to our employees, operating communities and host governments and our operations have performed very well throughout this pandemic. I will begin by providing an update on the Tasiast mill repairs. Most importantly, over the last few days, the mill has been turned and we are now confident that the gearless motor drive, the trunnion bearings and mill shell are in good shape. To note, we have included a link to a video of the mill restart test in our press release. Based on this, we are confident that the mill will restart in the fourth quarter. A new trommel screen has been ordered and the anticipated delivery date supports the planned mill restart timeline. Following the installation of the trommel screen, we expect to be able to resume operations at full capacity, essentially right away without a significant ramp up period. We remain confident in our ability to meet 2022 production targets as a high grade stockpile that we will build will be available at startup. The 21k project is now 90% complete. Commissioning activities of the power plant have begun and we expect it to be operational in the late part of Q4 and we expect to reach 21,000 tons per day in the first quarter of 2022. Additionally, we are exploring ways to potentially shorten the time needed to reach 24,000 tons per day by taking advantage of mill downtime to advance on the project tie-in sooner.

[Paul Rollinson:]

Thanks, Paul. In summary, we are making excellent progress on our key initiatives and our business remains in a strong position. The Tasiast mill is expected to be running in Q4. Despite the setbacks at Tasiast and Round Mountain, we expect both assets to be strongly repositioned for the future. Our investment grade balance sheet will continue to strengthen as we grow our production of free cash flow over the coming years and our shares remain highly attractive and we are initiating a buyback program to capitalize on this. With that, operator, I would now like to open up the call to questions.

[Operator:]

Thank you. Your first question comes from Tyler Langton from JPMorgan. Your line is open.

[Tyler Langton:]

Hi, good morning and thanks for taking my question. Just on sort of the cash cost guidance for the year. Can you provide a little bit more detail on sort of the impact of inflation and higher gold prices on that guidance? And then just I guess, when you think about the impact of potential inflationary pressures on 2022 – is 2021, I guess benefiting from any fuel hedges or supply contracts that’s sort of limiting the impact this year, but could kind of roll off next year?

[Andrea Freeborough:]

Sure. So, I would look at the increasing cash cost guidance as sort of three buckets and roughly a third, a third, a third, between the three. So, the first is just not having the Tasiast ounces, those were lower cost ounces. So, it’s really a function of sales mix. And the second being related to gold price, so we are at a higher gold price than our budget, we are paying higher royalties and we provided sensitivities on that with our guidance back in February. So, we set $5 an ounce for every $100 in gold price over our $1,500 budget price. And so the third bucket would be inflation. And we are just as we are watching the trends and inflation we have seen some inflation start to creep in just over the last month or two. And so that’s sort of the third bucket in terms of what – how we expect it might impact our cash costs for 2021. To answer your question on hedging, we have hedges in place. For 2021, we also have hedging in place for ‘22 and ‘23 just at sort of lower level. So for example, on fuel we have – we are about 55% hedged this year, 45% hedged in 2022 and then lower amount again for 2023.

[Tyler Langton:]

Okay, that’s really helpful. And then just switching to Round Mountain, I guess production was down just kind of slightly versus Q1 and costs were actually lower, I guess can you talk just a little bit about kind of what drove this performance and then just how you think about the second half in terms of production and costs?

[Paul Tomory:]

Well, Round Mountain, as you know, we are working through the mitigation plan for the instability that had been detected earlier in the year. First and foremost, we have essentially reduced the risk to a very low number, the wall has stopped moving. We continue our dewatering program. And what we have done at the mine is rather than mining in that Phase W, which was originally planned for the year, we have shifted focus to other parts of the operation. So for example, we are doing another cut at the bottom of the pit and we are developing further at Gold Hill, which is a satellite deposit as well as a portion of the main pit. So, it’s a – Round Mountain is complex in the sense that has a lot of sources of ore. And as we continue to unload that north wall, we will continue to rely on these disparate sources of ore. So, the various ore sources are going to be within the pit and the satellite pits from the heaps. And as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, the waste dump that we moved at the top of the pit proved to be mineralized. And we generated revenue there. But we expect quarterly production at Round Mountain to be in that high 50s range for the next couple of quarters. And it will be roughly at that level going into next year. And as we talked about on our last quarter, the higher annual production isn’t deferred until 2025, but we expect our Round Mountain production to be in that mid 200s to high 200s over the next couple of years.

[Tyler Langton:]

And should the costs be the sort of, should we expect costs to take a step up in the second half or too early to tell?

[Paul Tomory:]

Yes. Yes, costs will step up a little bit in the second half.

[Tyler Langton:]

Great. Alright, that’s it for me. Thanks so much.

[Operator:]

Your next question comes from Fahad Tariq from Credit Suisse. Your line is open.

[Fahad Tariq:]

Alright, good morning. Just continuing on Round Mountain, the $15 million in the remediation efforts cost, can you talk a little bit about how to reconcile that against the waste power recovery that you just touched on? And then also, how should we be thinking about that particular cost into 2022? Thanks.

[Paul Rollinson:]

So the overall, yes, I will paint a high level picture here, the gross cost additions at Round Mountain are related to moving that waste dump and we will essentially breakeven on that, because it proved to be mineralized, but also laying the wall back to a more shallow slope angle, so that will generate gross additional tonnages in the overall mine plan. However, I am very confident that we have already and will continue to find offsets that on an NPV basis and that doesn’t include Phase S, which I am also increasingly comfortable with. So, the gross additional costs of Round Mountain are not necessarily in the year, because our mining capacity is limited. So we are going to mine the same amount every year, but the result is the deferral of ounces as more waste has moved in the near-term. As for the accounting treatment, Andrea will talk about that.

[Andrea Freeborough:]

Yes, really. I mean, as Paul said, we are moving the same amount of ounces, it’s just the costs are being characterized as other operating costs given the situation there.

[Fahad Tariq:]

Okay. And on next year’s costs if we think about just like other operating expenses related to Round Mountain?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Yes. So I think for next year, we are probably going to call that mining costs because the gross additional cost next year will be stripping costs.

[Andrea Freeborough:]

So I mean, I’d say just other operating costs overall, the increase that we are seeing that I’ve talked about this year is really kind of a 1 year thing, it’s not something we expect to continue in terms of that level of other operating costs going forward.

[Fahad Tariq:]

Understood. Okay, thank you. That’s it for me.

[Operator:]

Your next question comes from Josh Wolfson from RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.

[Josh Wolfson:]

Thanks. Just wanted to sort of zone in a bit more on the costs for Chirano and Paracatu. As for Paracatu, I think you had mentioned that there were some sort of intermittent downtime items that affected that, but then also some local inflation. And then just want to understand, I guess where you see costs with these inflationary factors and then same thing, I guess, for Chirano, where I guess there is a bit fewer sort of external factors?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Great. So, there is a one-time maintenance downtime event on the conveyor, so that impacted the denominator, so that was contributor to the costs. Perhaps the biggest is the power cost increase. There is widespread drought in Brazil, particularly affecting areas with significant hydroelectric generation capacity. And given the equalization mechanism in the Brazil power market, we ended up having some exposure to the spot price. So the biggest increase in cost, Paracatu was related to higher than anticipated power costs. However, I should also point out that power cost impact would have been much greater, had we not owned our own power plants. So we are really happy that we have those plants. In addition, we do see some local cost inflation, labor costs are up about 5%, trending a little bit above the annual rate increases we have seen for a number of years. And we are starting to see some inflation in key consumables of which Paracatu uses a lot, for example, most notably grinding media, which is obviously a steel derived product. As for Chirano, its costs were high principally due to the relative mix of open pit and underground, where we are the mine sequence, but we expect those costs will improve with as we get deeper into the life of mine as we go to greater share of underground production.

[Josh Wolfson:]

Okay. And then there is some good commentary on production heading into 2022 and 2023. I am just wondering, on the capital side and some of the historical guidance provided of 800 and 700 for the next 2 years, there is obviously a lot of different moving parts here and even the historical numbers were under question given potential project growth opportunities. Where is the current thinking on the direction of the future capital numbers for ‘22 and ‘23?

[Paul Tomory:]

Sure. I’ll – maybe I will take a lead on that one, Josh. Yes, look, I mean, I think we do see us a slightly different dynamic between the operating cost inflation and the capital. Well, operating being a more of a sticky kind of lagging with things like labor, there is no question we are starting to see inflation come into the system. We think it will probably be a little bit greater around the capital side. And I think it’s a flow through there is a macro and a micro effect there with underlying commodities and microeconomic supply demand factor. We think it’s certainly here for the balance of the year and into next year. We think in some cases it will be a little bit greater maybe in the new project side, but we haven’t sort of finalized a prediction on what that number will be. But I think the comment we are trying to say is, yes, absolutely those capital numbers that we put out, which were there to support the 2.7 to 2.9 production now come with an inflation caveat. And we are going to be monitoring that and look to refine our view. So I would say we are biased to obviously increasing, but I don’t want to be kind of pinned down on the number just yet.

[Josh Wolfson:]

Okay. And sorry, just to clarify, I think the sort of understanding was kind of flat 900ish going forward to sustain the new higher volume of pits is sort of the impression that it could be above that sort of flat line expectation or just above what the historical guidance was, which was I guess low?

[Paul Tomory:]

Yes. So I think we had a few discussions around this point. We were out there with a 987 in terms of capital, which was to support the production guidance of 2.7 going to 2.9, ‘22/23. We then said if, to the extent we continue, I think that’s the point you are making, of continuing to run out at say the 2.9 level, we would expect the capital to come back up towards 900. And we set a postal code direction there would be to use a sort of a $300 per ounce kind of assumption. That’s how we have characterized it. And I think that’s all still true, but we are just trying to understand and get a little bit more focused here on where we might end up with the inflation effect on that.

[Josh Wolfson:]

Great.

[Paul Rollinson:]

And Josh, we are seeing inflationary impacts in some of our capital estimates, part of the increase at Manh Choh was inflation related. As I alluded to in my prepared remarks, some of it was scope related, some of it was value-added decision related, but there was an inflationary component. And we are seeing engineering firms, construction companies, bidding projects, with higher unit rates than they would have say a year ago in recognition of the fact that the overall capital project space is heating up.

[Josh Wolfson:]

Okay, that’s very helpful. Thank you very much.

[Operator:]

Your next question comes from Anita Soni from CIBC World Markets. Your line is open.

[Anita Soni:]

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. So, firstly, on Paracatu, I think we were looking for higher grades. I think it was from the western portion of the pit. When I look at your guidance for this year, it was saying that part of the drive up to 2.4, 2.7, 2.9, was higher grades of Paracatu. When can we expect to see that?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Well, we are still targeting production around just short of around 600 this year. We did have some lower grade in the past quarter, as we mined in parts of the pit that historically had lower grades. But as we are in that west part, in the next quarter in the fourth quarter, we do expect a slight upward trend in grade, but not huge.

[Anita Soni:]

Yes. And we are talking like 0.37 versus 0.4, is that the variance?

[Paul Rollinson:]

It’s – yes, that’s right, yes, 0.37 going to 0.4. Yes, that’s right.

[Anita Soni:]

Okay. Secondly, on Round Mountain, I am still trying to understand, because there was a bit of back and forth in terms of what the capital spend would be to flatten that slope and when that was going to happen? So in 2022 and 2023, you have got to do this pushback right to basically stabilize that wall. And I think that when you came back on the last conference call, you had mentioned that your kind of mining constraints there. So, I am just trying to understand that CapEx spend for, I think it was 30 million to 50 million tons that you had mentioned, needed to be moved to find that slope. And the timeframe I had assumed was the next 2 years. Whatever dollars per ton costs, I am just trying to understand, as I think about the capital going into next year, that to me is one of the biggest swing factors outside of your inflation comments. Could you give me some color on that?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Right, so we are doing that the mine plan redesign right now. We haven’t finalized the slopes. We put in the dewatering wells in the last quarter. We are – pressures are coming down. And we are finalizing the geotech design. So, the total quantum of tons is not yet finalized. But you are correct in the assumption that principally the moving of those tons, will take place over the next 2 years. We are mining constrained, Round Mountain does about 100 million tons a year. So, instead of – and this is the principal reason for the push out on the Phase W ounces instead of mining central proportion of waste in the ore, where it’s now greater proportion of waste within that 100 million constraint. So, we will work through that excess in the next 2 years. And the total quantum of tons, I can’t tell you exactly what it will be right now. But it’s likely at the upper end of that range you talked about.

[Anita Soni:]

Okay. And then my last question, I will pass it off to other people. Just trying to understand Tasiast at this stage, so I would assume prior to the fire you guys, that happened in the last couple of weeks, you were a little behind on the stripping in accessing the higher grade ores. That’s why we saw this lower grade coming through this quarter. And some portion of that would then also have been, I guess, stockpiles feeding the mill. How are you doing now, as with this sort of dealing with the fire and trying to get back up and restarted. How are the mining rates in the last month and I guess, five weeks going, because I guess we are contingent upon you. One of the things that you had mentioned was that, you would get ahead or get caught up on your strippings and you could access those higher grade ores that were expected to drive, I guess, plus point – plus 2 gram per ton material next year?

[Paul Rollinson:]

That’s right. So, we continue to mine. So, the mine was down for maybe two days at the time of fire. But we are back up to the mining rate that we need. And what’s happening right now is principally waste movement and building at this point, today, medium grade stockpiles. As planned, we are going to get into the higher grade portion in the fourth quarter. And those are going to be stockpiled as well during the middle of rebuild. So, in effect, what’s happening is at the start of January 2022, we expect to have the mill running full tilt. We expect the mining, run of mine high grade material, in addition to having a couple of months worth of high grade stockpile on the ground. Now, that this grade in that stockpile is not so high that it will displace what we would have mined from high grade next year anyway. But it does provide a de-risking element in that. It allows some flexibility on mining rate next year. So, short story is this mill downtime provides the silver lining opportunity caught up on the mine plan, get back into a position where we are mining west ranch for high grades, and then de-risking next year’s production profile with the availability of stockpile material.

[Anita Soni:]

And those west ranch high grades they were north of 2.5 grams of raw material, right? Is that correct?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Yes.

[Anita Soni:]

Okay. And then I had one last question. Sorry, just with the Q4 guidance that you will be starting up sometime in Q4. Could you provide just – apologies to ask this question, but could you provide some clarity, because, Q4 is a big – pretty big window? And is it early Q4, late Q4 for the restart, or is it just near the end of the year kind of thing?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Well, I will describe what exactly is happening. So, we are – we have turned the mill. We have done the integrity checks on the mill, the motor, the trunnions, and other associated key components. In general, the big important things are okay. There is some damage to some ancillary things like the intake and the discharge chutes, some structural work on a cyclone tower. And working backwards, the thing that needs to be replaced, and it drives the critical path to return to production is the trommel screen. We placed an order. And we expect to have that arrive at site, call it late October or early November. So, it doesn’t get better than that. That is the critical path. And it will depend on the installation time which we envisage. It will be about two weeks. So, it’s not inconceivable that that mill is turning with the new trommel screen sometime in November. In a best case scenario, we have a good production month in December. But our revised guidance assumes no production this year. And we would strive to try to beat that. But right now we are assuming full fledged 100% throughput startup January 1, with an upside towards some production in December.

[Anita Soni:]

Okay, thank you. That’s it for my questions.

[Operator:]

Your next question comes from Mike Parkin from National Bank Financial. Your line is open.

[Mike Parkin:]

Hi, guys. Just a couple of questions left. The other operating expense, we got guidance for this year. How do you see that trending as we go into 2022, if you can give color on that?

[Andrea Freeborough:]

I guess Mike, I would say first of all, it’s by the nature of those costs are difficult to predict. But the increase that I have talked about in my remarks for this year is sort of a one-time thing. It’s not something we would expect to repeat next year. So, there is no reason to expect at this point that next year wouldn’t be you back to what we have seen in the last year, prior to 2021.

[Mike Parkin:]

And then just one final question. Congrats in signing that agreement with the Mauritanian government. Can you just give us a bit of color, where the sticking point was on Tasiast sued and why that was excluded to get the main part signed off and where the kind of negotiations still sit with Tasiast sued?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Sure, I will hand it off to Geoff here who was, intimately involved in that whole process. But our focus and priority always was to get the main event, which is the Tasiast mine bottom down, and we are very glad we have done that as it relates to Geoff, maybe the..?

[Geoff Gold:]

Sure. Yes. That’s right, Paul. And Mike, I guess what I would say is, our previous arrangements on sue contemplated a different approach and ownership structure and the main agreement on Tasiast, it was delaying our negotiations. So, excluding it was a catalyst for signing the agreement and banking the main economic event at Tasiast as Paul just said. I would say that, with the main agreement now signed at , the door is wide open with the government to find solutions on sued and discussions will certainly continue. And I guess, the last thing I would say is that, while sued has got perspective, it’s not material at this time. And certainly both the main task is the northern properties that we own remain, remain perspective.

[Mike Parkin:]

Okay, that’s it for me, guys. Thanks so much.

[Operator:]

Your next question comes from Tanya Jakusconek from Scotiabank. Your line is open.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

Thank you. Good morning everybody. And congratulations on getting that Tasiast mill startup – I guess startup getting it on track for Q4. Just two questions, I would like to start with Paul, I am just coming back on to that inflation question. Both from capital and operating costs, can we just go through in your cost structure? Just you mentioned labor, that specifically labor in Brazil? Are you seeing labor inflation in the U.S. and/or Russia and maybe some of the other consumables where you are seeing inflationary pressures on your costs first? And then coming back to your capital, I have some more questions on that.

[Paul Rollinson:]

Okay. I will walk through the cost bar for operating expenses. In the labor area, we are seeing cost increases that are only modestly higher than historical trends principally in Brazil. And we are starting to see a tick up in the U.S. and Russia. And what I am seeing here is, it’s a 3% instead of 2%, or 4%, instead of 3%, so to remain somewhat tamed. But in Brazil, it is something we are focused on. We are definitively seeing labor cost inflation in Brazil. What we are seeing in the U.S. and also in parts of in South America is labor availability, and that will drive up labor costs down the road, if there isn’t a normalization on that labor availability trend. In terms of consumables WTI is what it is you can do that calculation yourself on a net of hedge basis, we provide information on the degree of our hedging. The other consumables where we are starting to see especially more recently, an uptick in inflation are key things like grinding steel, cyanide, explosives. And importantly, for example, in areas like cyanide and explosives, we are seeing 10% increases that are principally going to be impacting Q3 and Q4 year-to-date. The numbers there have been more 2% or 3% or 4%. But as we work through some of those lower costs inventories, we are now getting into material that’s 10% to 12% higher in costs. On those chemical chain, so cyanide, explosives and reagent. In the case of grinding media, particularly at the large mills like Tasiast, Paracatu and Fort Knox, we are seeing pretty significant increases of 30%, certainly looking at the next two months. And again, it’s been more team in the first two quarters as we work through the inventories, but there we are seeing about 30% going forward. And then the last part of costs is the big maintenance category, both on services and spares. There is probably where we see the lowest pressure as yet. And so I think when you put it all together, we are probably seeing as Andrea said in her remarks, about a third of the cash cost revision upward is due to the inflation component. So, it’s been manageable in the first half. But here in May and June and heading into July and August, we do see inflation picking up into the back half of the year on our backs.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

But inflation itself wouldn’t have taken us out of our original…?

[Paul Rollinson:]

That’s right. Yes.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

Just for overall context?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Yes. Had it only been inflation, we would have been at the top end of our cash cost range.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

Third, $40 an ounce is $12. So yes, no, I got that. Maybe on just the capital cost, it seems as though you mentioned, Paul, that the inflationary pressures are more on contractors and firms, it doesn’t seem as though there is specific issues of labor within that component that is, have you focused on or maybe just a bit of more clarity there?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Yes. So in CapEx, we probably see more inflation or the risk of greater inflation than in OpEx, because we are supposed to go with the monetary side of inflation. In other words, the price of individual input is going up. But also tightness in the supply chain itself. So, limited number of fabricators, value added equipment, limited pool of construction and engineering. And as I said earlier, we are seeing them bid projects with higher pricing and even six months ago or a year ago. So, as a result of both the monetary side, in other words, price inflation on straight up commodities, we are also seeing that value add supply-demand tightness. And as I said earlier, with reference demand show, we are seeing 10% to 15% inflation related to capital estimates on growth projects, which is higher than what we are seeing on the OpEx side.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

That’s good color on that. And then maybe just for Paul Rollinson, congratulations on the share buyback, noticed on the slide that you have $115 million coming from dividends and $150 million from the share buyback, is that $150 million from the share buyback a minimum? And also what would you need to see, to go beyond that $150 million?

[Paul Rollinson:]

Sure, thanks, Tanya. Look, that’s certainly how we are looking at it. It’s a start. I mean, that’s the way I look at it. Our intention was always to get into a buyback situation at this point in the year. Then we had the setback with Tasiast. And as you know, where as a result will be different production and cash flow. So, we are going to be down cash flow from where we thought we were going to be pre-fire. Notwithstanding that, we are continuing on with this buyback. And I think that doubly sort of underscores our confidence in the business. When we look at the $150 million, we have established as a sort of a baseline forever with the dividend. It seem to us a reasonable starting point, given the scenario we are in right now would be to double – target to double that $150 million to $300 million. We are on track. There is nothing operationally that we are looking at. I guess if I were to rewind a couple of weeks, if we were 90% confident we would end up where we are today, a few weeks ago when we gave a mill fire update. If we were wrong, if we were in the 10% category and it would have been longer than fourth quarter perhaps that might have impacted our thinking around the buyback. But it has played out as we predicted. And so there is nothing operationally that would prevent us from continuing with this buyback. Is it a – it’s a target, we have tried to give some color. I think a lot of people tend to put out 5% NCIBs. And who knows what happens. We have tried to be very specific. And you should hold us accountable for that number. Could it be higher, sure. Well, we will see how the world goes from here.

[Tanya Jakusconek:]

Great, thank you.

[Operator:]

There is no further question at this time. I would now like to turn the call over to Mr. Paul Rollinson.

[Paul Rollinson:]

Great. Thanks, operator. Thank you, everyone, and thanks for joining us this morning. We look forward to catching up in person hopefully, light at the end of the tunnel in the coming weeks and months. Thank you.

[Operator:]

This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.