Thank you, operator, and thank you, everyone, for joining us today to discuss our fourth quarter results. During the call, we will be making forward-looking statements.

As such, I encourage you to read the cautionary notes that accompany this presentation, our MD&A, and the related news release. As a reminder, the presentation is available on our website, and that all dollar references are in U.S.

dollars unless otherwise noted. On today's call are Tristan Pascall, our Chief Executive Officer; Ryan MacWilliam, our Chief Financial Officer; and Rudi Badenhorst, our Chief Operating Officer.

With that, I will hand the call over to Tristan for opening remarks. Thank you.

Thank you, Bonita. Thank you, everybody, for joining us today to discuss our fourth quarter and year-end results.

We entered 2025 with four clear priorities, and our steady delivery on these throughout the year has now positioned us well for a strong 2026. Firstly, we set out to strengthen our balance sheet and enhance our financial flexibility.

This was achieved through the support of our investors in a series of bond transactions that extended the company's debt maturities and reduced our cost of capital. Additionally, we completed a $1 billion streaming transaction with Royal Gold that also represents the largest U.S.

corporate investment in Zambia to date. Our hedging program, which we put in place in 2024, fulfilled its intended role as risk mitigation during the construction of the Kansanshi S3 Expansion.

We expect to regain full exposure to spot copper prices by the second half of the year, on which Ryan will speak in his financial review. Our next priority, safe and productive operational performance, remains a continued focus, and the company achieved its 2025 production targets, which Rudi will cover in his operational review.

Also a priority in 2025 was the execution and delivery of the S3 Expansion project at Kansanshi. I'm very pleased with our progress at S3, which achieved a major milestone with the declaration of commercial production last December, and I will speak in more detail on this towards the end of my prepared remarks.

Our fourth priority continues to be achieving a long-term resolution for Cobre Panama. Whilst we await the start of formal discussions with the government of Panama on this matter, we have made meaningful progress on the preservation and safe management plan to ensure the assets remain in good condition and the site is safely and well environmentally managed.

During the fourth quarter, Unit 2 at the power plant was successfully hot commissioned and synchronized to the grid. The unit achieved its full design capacity of 150 megawatts output in December, reflecting the effectiveness of the maintenance program undertaken at site over the past 2 years.

The plant is currently operating steadily at an average output of around 120 megawatts, consistent with the site's power requirements and broader national grid demand. The remaining unit, Unit 1, moved into commissioning in early February and is performing according to expectations.

Subsequent to quarter end, in January, the president of Panama announced that the government would approve the removal, processing, and export of stockpiled ore at Cobre Panama. It is important to emphasize that processing of the ore stockpiles does not constitute a restart of mining operations, and processing of this material is intended to address environmental and operational risks linked to the long-term stockpile storage, such as acid rock drainage, while also supplying necessary material for reinforcement of our tailings management facility.

We continue to await formal approvals. However, on a preliminary basis, we expect that processing of the stockpiles could begin roughly 3 months after receiving formal regulatory notice and would take approximately 1 year to complete.

From this stockpile, we estimate production of approximately 70,000 tonnes of copper, and this activity would support the costs of ongoing asset and environmental management at the mine. We are pleased with the government's decision to authorize the processing of the stockpiles.

Alongside allowing proper environmental stewardship, this will generate significant income for the country and create jobs for over 1,000 additional Panamanians, along with broader indirect employment across local procurement, such as equipment supply, transportation, logistics, camp, and food services. We continue to await the formal approvals for removal and processing of the stockpiles, which will be carried out in close coordination with the government of Panama and in full compliance with our preservation and safe management plan.

It is important to reiterate that the processing of the stockpiles is not a reopening of the mine, and we echo the president's call for transparency and engagement. The resources at Cobre Panama belong to the people of Panama.

We remain committed to dialogue to achieve an amicable and durable resolution of the mine for the country and the Panamanian people. In parallel, the integral audit conducted by SGS commenced in the fourth quarter.

Our team in Panama continues to cooperate fully with the audit, providing all requested documentation and cooperating in the field visits and inspections. We welcome the audit, and we are confident that it will confirm that Cobre Panama has always operated at the highest environmental standards.

The integral audit is expected to be concluded in April 2026. Separate to the integral audit, and as part of our ESIA obligations, the authorities continued with the statutory biannual audits of Cobre Panama's compliance.

We are pleased to share that the most recently published audit achieved 100% compliance. The latest external audit field phase was completed in November, and we expect a final report during the first quarter.

I will now pass the call to Rudi for his operational review.

Thank you, Tristan. We are happy to have closed out 2025, achieving our revised guidance ranges.

For the year, we achieved copper production of 396,000 tonnes, within the revised copper guidance range, while annual gold production of 152,000 ounces and annual nickel production of 23,000 tonnes were above the top ends of their respective revised guidance ranges. Looking to 2026, we remain focused on cost management and safe operational execution across all our sites.

During the fourth quarter, total copper production was approximately 100,000 tonnes, a 4% decrease from the previous quarter, as Sentinel continued to be impacted by bolt fatigue maintenance and rainy season power interruptions. Copper sales were strong at 108,000 tonnes, exceeding production by approximately 8,000 tonnes.

At Kansanshi, we delivered a solid quarter, with 48,000 tonnes of copper, up 774 tonnes from the previous quarter. This improvement was driven by a successful ramp-up of S3 Expansion, which contributed to higher overall milled throughput.

Notably, the site achieved a record monthly milled tonnes in October. Following successful commissioning and strong performance across all key production indicators, S3 declared commercial production as of December the 1st.

The crushing and milling circuit performed well, with significant improvements in stability and uptime as enhancements to the conveyor routes took effect. Work on tailings storage facility 2 is progressing well and remains on track for completion in the second quarter of this year.

In 2026, Kansanshi is expected to produce 175 to 205,000 tonnes of copper and 110 to 120,000 ounces of gold. Of this, S3 is expected to contribute over 84,000 tonnes of copper, sourced evenly from low-grade stockpiles and fresh ore from the Southeast Dome.

At Sentinel, copper production totaled 48,000 tonnes in Q4, a reduction of 3,000 tonnes from the previous quarter. This decrease was due to lower throughput and lower grades.

Throughput was impacted by ongoing maintenance related to bolt fatigue on ball mill 2, while grades were affected by a higher proportion of material from stage 3. Looking ahead of 2026, production at Sentinel is expected to be between 190 and 220,000 tonnes of copper.

The operational focus will continue to be on increasing throughput and improving consistency through optimization of blast fragmentation, maintaining stable crushed ore stockpile volumes, improving milling rates, and flotation recoveries. Grades are expected to strengthen modestly as we access previously sterilized stage 1 and stage 2 ore following the crusher relocations.

Stage 4 ore is expected to come online in the second half of this year. Regarding ball mill 2, in collaboration with the original equipment manufacturer and specialist consultants, we have established a long-term fatigue management strategy.

We will continue managing the fatigue through this year, with full remedial work planned for the first half of 2027 when new parts become available. This approach ensures ongoing performance while enabling a permanent solution through next year's planned upgrades.

Enterprise delivered excellent performance, achieving record quarterly production of 9,000 tonnes of nickel, a 52% increase from quarter 3. This improvement was driven by improved recoveries and mining of fresh, higher-grade sulfide zones at lower elevations in the bottom of the pit.

For 2026, Enterprise is expected to produce 30 to 40,000 tonnes of contained nickel. Our focus at Enterprise remains on maximizing ore supply, improving comminution efficiency, and maintaining an optimum run-of-mine stockpile to support blending and stable throughput.

Grade control drilling will continue to help reduce dilution and improve recoveries. At Cobre Panama, we continued detailed inspections and preservation activities during the quarter.

Working closely with original equipment manufacturer teams, we completed reviews of the ultra-class haul trucks, production drills, and rope shovels. Their findings are being integrated into our ongoing preservation strategies to ensure equipment integrity and future reliability.

Thank you, and with that, I'll hand the call over to Ryan for his financial review.

Thanks, Rudi. Starting with commodity markets, which ended the year on a buoyant note, a sentiment which has continued into 2026.

During Q4, the copper price averaged $5.03 per pound, peaking at $5.71, a strong performance driven by both supply and demand. On the supply side, four of the world's top 20 largest copper mines are currently running at reduced production.

On the demand side, copper stockpiles continue to grow in the U.S. due to the threat of potential tariffs on future imports.

We would note that it is important in times like these, where prices start to rise, that we remain laser-focused on costs. This helps avoid the margin compression that can occur as the benefit of stronger commodity prices on the revenue line are offset by a rising cost base.

In this respect, it is helpful that despite generally strong commodity markets, oil prices remain fairly subdued, with resilient U.S. and OPEC production keeping the market well-supplied.

Turning to our fourth quarter results. Revenue was up 10% quarter-over-quarter, underpinned by higher metal prices.

This drove a 7% increase in EBITDA and a $73 million improvement in net earnings. Copper C1 costs rose by 13% to $2.21 per pound, reflecting the lower production that Rudi spoke to, along with higher power, labor, and maintenance costs.

Gold price tailwinds resulted in elevated byproduct credits, providing a 14 cents offset. The Enterprise quarterly nickel all-in sustaining costs came in at $3.96 per pound against nickel prices, which averaged $7.

These strong margins are a reminder of the high-grade nature of the Enterprise nickel sulfide ore body. Nickel prices were depressed for much of last year, with the market being in surplus, but have recently rallied following production cuts announced in Indonesia.

At Cobre Panama, the PNSM program continued to incur between $15 and $17 million per month to support the environmental stewardship of the mine and local procurement. $45 million was incurred in Q4, and $400 million has been spent since the mine was placed on PNSM.

Operating costs to process the stockpiled ore will cost between $12 and $12.50 per tonne milled. Upfront cash investment will be required, with cash outflows peaking at around $250 million.

On the basis that formal approval is received shortly for the stockpiles, we would expect to be broadly cash flow neutral by year-end at Cobre Panama, inclusive of PNSM costs. Further, on care and maintenance, the sale of Las Cruces both simplifies our portfolio and delivers approximately $30 million in annual cost savings, while paving the way for development of the project under a new owner.

On the balance sheet, it is pleasing to announce our new syndicated term loan and revolving credit facility. This frees up about $360 million of liquidity in this year, whilst securing a larger RCF and extending both maturities to 2029.

The refinancing process has underscored the strong backing we continue to receive from our banks, with the participation of several new lenders in a highly oversubscribed transaction. The availability of the facilities is subject to customary closing conditions.

Furthermore, we've also announced a new $1.35 billion 10-year unsecured bond offering this morning. Lastly, I'm pleased to highlight that this week the rating agency S&P has moved our B rating to a positive outlook, recognizing our progress in strengthening the balance sheet and their positive expectations on the return of Cobre Panama later this year.

Moving on to guidance. Across the 3-year guidance period, we've lifted our copper C1 and all-in cost guidance ranges to reflect the update to production guidance, higher costs, and the incorporation of inflationary pressures, which are somewhat offset by stronger gold prices.

These higher costs are driven by the appreciation of the kwacha, the Zambian collective bargaining agreements, and increased maintenance across Sentinel and Kansanshi. Both copper C1 and all-in costs trend downwards across the 3-year guidance period as production improves with higher grades expected to be fed into the Kansanshi S3 circuits from the new Southeast Dome pit.

While cash cost guidance in 2026 and 2027 benefited from higher assumed gold prices, Guelb Moghrein gold sales will no longer be treated as byproduct credits as gold production is expected to pause from Q2 2026. On capex guidance, we spent about $240 million less in 2025 than initially guided on, with some of that moving into 2026, such as planned replacements at Kansanshi.

2026 guidance also includes the added work on Sentinel's ball mill 2, in-pit crusher 4 relocation, and a third tailings pipeline. Capex reduces over the course of the 3-year guidance period, driven by the wind-down of Southeast Dome pre-stripping at Kansanshi and the completion of Zambian tailings facility works, as well as the crusher installation at Kansanshi and the crusher relocation at Sentinel.

On to hedging. The collars that rolled off in Q4 yielded copper and gold hedge losses of $42 million in aggregate.

Our 2026 planned copper and gold production both remain roughly 20% hedged for the full year and 50% hedged for the first half of the year. At current spot prices, we anticipate losses of around $220 million and $23 million respectively on our copper and gold hedge positions.

Hedging has been an important tool in providing us with stability and downside protection during the S3 construction and ramp-up. However, at this stage, our existing hedges expire by midyear, and we do not anticipate adding more hedges given our strong margins at these copper prices.

During the quarter, net debt increased by $441 million to $5.2 billion. This was driven by two key factors.

Firstly, an increase in working capital as accounts receivable increased due to late shipments in December. Secondly, the sharp rise in copper prices at the year-end necessitated higher margin deposits associated with our short-term customer QP hedges.

Both of these are expected to unwind through the current quarter at stable copper prices. Liquidity remains very strong at $1.9 billion, comprising of $644 million in cash and a fully undrawn credit revolver of $1.3 billion at quarter end.

In short, we close the year with supportive copper and gold markets, a disciplined cost management approach, a strengthened balance sheet, and solid liquidity, positioning us very well for 2026. I will now hand the call back to Tristan.

Thank you, Ryan. Over the last 2 years, it has been a highlight of my prepared remarks to speak on the progress at S3.

However, with the announcement of commercial production, this will be part of Rudi's operational review going forward. I am extremely proud of our delivery of the Kansanshi S3 Expansion project.

This has been a product of huge collaborative effort across our projects and operations teams and a supportive investment climate delivered by the government of Zambia. As Rudi noted, the S3 Expansion delivered strong performance across all key production indicators, which supported the declaration of commercial production.

Broadly speaking, while several metrics were considered, commercial production was declared once S3 demonstrated consistent performance at 90% of its design capacity. This was accomplished within 5 months of initial production.

This is a significant achievement for a project of this size. At a throughput capacity of 25 million tonnes per annum, S3 is one of the largest global brownfield copper projects delivered in recent years, and I would like to congratulate and express my gratitude to the entire team that delivered this successful outcome.

In terms of new project opportunities at First Quantum, I am pleased to announce that we will be shortly releasing an updated 43-101 technical report for the Taca Taca project later this month. Taca Taca is one of the world's largest undeveloped copper assets, and Argentina is emerging as an increasingly competitive mining jurisdiction, supported by recent economic reforms aimed at attracting greater foreign direct investment.

Globally, there are several growth projects being advanced to address the anticipated supply deficit in the copper market. However, I firmly believe that First Quantum is uniquely positioned to deliver on this growth.

We expect Taca Taca to follow First Quantum's tested and proven design and construction approach of large-scale SAG mill processing trains with expansion optionality. Taca Taca will involve, for example, installation of First Quantum's seventh and eighth SAG mill at the 40-foot size and will leverage from the company's extensive experience in development and operations at Sentinel, Cobre Panama, and most recently the S3 Expansion at Kansanshi.

We look forward to sharing the updated technical report, which represents an important step in de-risking the project as we continue to advance the ESIA, prepare our RIGI application, and evaluate the optimal financing strategy for the project. Whilst Taca Taca is important to First Quantum's long-term growth options, and similarly this year we will also advance the La Granja and Haquira projects on their own merits, I want to clearly state that our priorities for this year 2026 remain: firstly, progressing towards resolution at Cobre Panama; secondly, to ensure continued safe and productive performance at our operations, including ramp-up of the Kansanshi S3 Expansion project; and thirdly, to strengthen the balance sheet to ensure that the company is well-positioned to support future growth.

We had meaningful achievements in our priorities for 2025, and I am extremely proud and grateful for the dedication of the entire team at First Quantum. Our position today is a direct result of their hard work.

We have collectively accomplished a lot over the last couple of years, and I am confident in the outlook for First Quantum because of the deep talent pool within the company, our meaningful participation and long-term relationships in our host countries, and the growing strategic importance of copper. Thank you, operator.

I'm happy to open the lines for questions.

Thanks, operator, and good morning, team. Tristan and Rudi, when it comes to the potential for the same remedial work and permanent solutions that you're seeking in ball mill number 2 at Sentinel, transferring that over into ball mill number 1, are you going to wait for the review to make that conclusion?

When will that review be concluded?

Thanks very much for the question, Ralph. Rudi, do you want to take that one?

No problem, Tristan. Hi, Ralph.

The final repairs to ball mill 2, as established with the OEM and ourselves, will take place in the first half of 2027. Now, we have ordered an additional end can and upgraded discharge end purely to take advantage of the foundry slot that we've had.

We've effectively run with one strategic spare. Ball mill 1 is getting a review principally because it's from the same vendor and no other reason.

It is currently performing well, and we do not have any issues with it.

I see. It looks as though that there's going to be some degree of throttle-back on the throughput, but also, Rudi, some of your comments in your pre-prepared comments talked about increasing total throughput as well.

Just wondering how you're balancing the two between risk mitigation and desire to increase throughput.

Rudi? Yes.

Thanks, Tristan. Ralph, we indicated that we will be doing a couple of projects at Sentinel this year, primarily to debottleneck the back end of the circuit.

Those relate to the installation of upgraded feedwells to our tailings thickeners, but also the installation of a new tailings line and the reline of an existing one. Effectively, what that does, it helps us to increase throughput through the back end, which is currently the bottleneck.

The first one of those have already been replaced in January. The second one will be already replaced this quarter, and the third one during the end of the second quarter, followed by the thickened tailings lines in Q3.

Debottlenecking the circuit allows for the opportunity to increase throughput, albeit maintenance stoppages on ball mill 2.

Hi, good morning. A couple of questions on Cobre Panama, please.

You mentioned, Tristan, that the company's yet to start formal discussions on a new agreement in Panama. Can you give us an idea of what the hurdles are?

Are you just basically waiting for the completion of the environmental audit? Is that expected to kick the process off?

Hi, Orest. Thanks.

I think in Panama since the middle of last year, you've seen concrete milestones passing, and that revolved around approval of the preservation and safe management plan, export of the concentrate, the restart of the power plant, and the commencement of the environmental audit, and then most recently the announcement by the president that the government would approve the removal of the stockpiles and processing associated with that. Looking forward, the president has made announcements around dealing with the matters at Cobre Panama.

I think, as you point out, the environmental audit is one of the key elements in that timetable. We do expect the audit will be completed in April.

We'll have to assess the next steps and timing from there, but certainly that does seem to be one of the key elements in terms of the pathway from here.

Okay. Thank you.

As a follow-up, thank you for the disclosure around some of the partial restart costs here to turn on one mill train to process these ore stockpiles, the $230 to $280 million range. I'm just curious, is that a good rule of thumb in terms of incremental costs to eventually restart all the mill trains?

Orest, it's a little bit of a moving target at the moment because you can you can paint different scenarios to restart around the timing and ramp-up of that in terms of stage of approvals. If we if we follow our pathway, well, if we just look at the stockpiles and the restart of the the plant is important to that stockpile reprocessing, that allows us to remove that material, which does cause some acid rock drainage and will greatly improve our water quality control at sediment pond 2 and the discharge in the Petiquilla side, and also in terms of feed to the tailings dam and being able to cope with, high rainfall and and erosion and so on that we do get on the tailings dam.

If we just look at that, it's probably 3 months to get that moving, and it would it would be on the basis of the cost that we outlined there, around $12 to $12.50 per pound—per tonne milled, and and hence those capital costs that you refer to there. If if something else comes through in terms of timetable, and we don't have that we don't have that clear as yet, that would shift around disclosure from the government of Panama around that.

Hi, thanks, operator. Hi, guys.

Thanks for taking my question. I just wanted to ask about the overall unit cost guidance.

You guys have a lot of operational improvements that you're going to be delivering across the portfolio over the next couple of years. If I look at Sentinel, for example, where you're commissioning the overland conveyor system, you're expanding the trolley assist network, you're expecting slightly higher grades, volumes across the business are going to be rising, which should lead to some fixed cost dilution.

Yet your unit cost guidance is effectively at the middle of the guidance range, or your baseline guidance cost being flat over the next few years. I'm wondering, is there potential for the costs to be significantly lower than what you're guiding to?

Is your guidance conservative? If not, I'm wondering what are the offsetting inflationary factors?

You mentioned some of the cost inflation that you're seeing in the business now, but I'm wondering what the inflationary factors are that you're kind of baking into your assumptions here where those inflationary factors are offsetting the benefits of some of these operational improvements that you guys are expected to deliver. Thank you.

Thanks, Chris. Hi.

I'm sure Ryan will add comment, but just, big picture, the tradeoff at Sentinel is between volume and you're seeing the the throughput, you're seeing the effort that's been put in there into into deliver throughput, and you're seeing that in terms of the front end of the plant and the dry plant pushing there. As Rudi mentioned, debottlenecking in the back end to to continue that trend.

We have had, that is offset by grade and our management of that as we get into, fresher material beneath stage 3 and and also open up stage 4 over the next year, couple of years. We'll be able to offset that grade, and we'll see good material come through.

On the cost side, it's really a story around, commodity inflation, as Ryan points out, and labor. Ryan, do you have anything else to add there?

Sure. Thanks for the question, Chris.

We do see cost guidance fall, albeit fairly slightly, through the 3-year period, from $1.95 to $2.20 for 2026 down to $1.85 to $2.10 in 2028. In terms of the swings and roundabouts, as Tristan notes, in 2028, we actually see slightly weaker production from Sentinel due to lower grades that year, which somewhat offsets the fact at that stage we expect to be fully feeding S3 from Southeast Dome higher-grade materials.

Some positives and negatives on the production side there. Similar on the cost side, where we're seeing strong gold byproduct credits, albeit our gold price guidance is potentially conservative, it's quite a lot below current spot prices.

The flip side is we're seeing a stronger kwacha in Zambia as they make continued progress with reforming their economy, the kwacha now sub-20 kwacha to the dollar. That has impacts on our labor costs and slightly higher contract and maintenance costs through the period.

We've also been cautious and fairly conservative in our electricity cost guidance, where we assume for most of the guidance period that we'll continue to buy power from external sources. If we see stronger rainfalls in Zambia and we move more back to the ZESCO contracts as a portion, that will be another cost tailwind through the period relative to what we have in our guidance.

That's very helpful. Thank you.

Good luck, guys.

Hello, can you hear me?

Great. Thank you, and apologies for that.

Two questions for me, if I may. First, considering greenfield projects and specifically Taca Taca, you kind of alluded to it earlier, but does Cobre Panama need to be up and running before you consider any major new investments here or say at any other greenfield projects?

Then second, given the ongoing activity in the sector, are you seeing any interest in your assets at the project partnership level, say beyond the JV with Rio? Thank you.

Hi, Cody. Thanks for those questions.

Look, our progress on Taca Taca this year will be on the project's own merits. What I mean by that is, we will pursue the RIGI application.

First, as I referenced, we'll be releasing the 43-101 technical report, very shortly this month, we expect, and then that builds the pathway towards RIGI application. In the meantime and around that timetable, we'd like to see the ESIA and the water permitting come through, and really that builds an underlying pathway to explore financing options.

I think Cobre Panama is important to that, but we do need to make progress on those on their own standing. The balance sheet and our financial capacity is also important to that, but again, the more that we're able to progress the project on the own merits, the market does appear strong in terms of supporting that, and we'd like to progress it and see where that gets to.

RIGI is a timetable, and we're anticipating that timetable as well, but balancing all of that through, we have a clear plan, and it revolves around our execution capability in terms of developing a strong plan and something that meets the expectations of Argentina and again while also reflecting the stronger investment climate in Argentina. In terms of interest around that project, look, we wouldn't speculate on that too much other than to say I think that buy versus build is a strong challenge, and a pipeline where you have options to be able to develop copper projects in the very near future and the capacity to do that with the execution capability that is, for example, available at First Quantum is hard to find.

We're taking a team that built Sentinel, that built Cobre Panama, that has just completed S3, they're currently looking at the maintenance and the preservation of Cobre Panama, and all of that lends itself to a capacity to look at something like Taca Taca or indeed La Granja in the long term, and that's just not readily available out there in terms of that execution capability.

Thanks. Just a few quick questions.

Maybe just a bit of clarity on that last Taca Taca question. What's the best-case for FID, if we kind of put Cobre Panama aside?

In terms of getting RIGI through and then the environmental and water permits, is best case kind of early 2027, or is it going to take longer? That's the first question.

Thanks, Miles. Look, our main focus is de-risking, but, Ryan, do you want to comment further on that?

Sure. Hi, Miles.

To be clear, before Cobre Panama was placed on PNSM, our priority focus as a company was on debt reduction. Nothing has changed in that regard, we continue to be focused on debt reduction.

It's pleasing that despite Cobre Panama being on PNSM over the last 2 years, we've actually made progress in debt reduction, but that continues to be the focus. As Tristan said, pleasing to have a variety of growth options within the portfolio, but those need to come in due course as we focus on deleveraging the balance sheet.

Clearly, strong commodity prices help in that respect. Clearly, if Cobre Panama comes back online, that would help, but we're not yet at the point where we're talking to specific timing milestones for approving Taca Taca because we first need to work through that deleveraging pathway that's ahead of us.

Okay. A second question, maybe just related to that as well, Ryan, in terms of the balance sheet.

Where do you want to get to? Is it investment-grade kind of metrics?

Is there a net debt target where you kind of think job done, let's kind of pivot the focus?

I don't think, Miles, we're ever going to be complacent on the balance sheet, and I don't think it will ever be job done. What we've talked to is being responsible and prudent in managing the balance sheet.

A big part of that is looking to work with others on our projects. A good example of that was the partnership at La Granja, which was referenced in the previous question, so that when we do get to these future project builds, we don't put all of that on our balance sheet.

We finished last year at 3.3 times net debt to EBITDA, and we've generally talked about you want to be around or below the 1 times net debt to EBITDA before you start a next greenfield project build. That being said, at Taca Taca at the moment, the work is really focused on de-risking the project.

We're focused around bolstering the balance sheet, and we'll make decisions in due course when that moment comes, but we're not there yet, and we don't expect to be there in the near term.

Thank you. Morning, everyone.

A couple of follow-ups on my side. Maybe first on Panama, you obviously provided some details around costs and capex to start the dealing process, which is great.

Just wondering if you have early estimates in terms of total capex for a full restart as well, including on the mining side. If you can comment on how the momentum has been for the Unit 2 restart at the power plant.

Obviously not as relevant, but just to try and understand the stage of the preservation of equipment. Then maybe secondly, Las Cruces just got sold a few months back.

Just wondering if there's consideration to sell other minor operations as well, and to focus on the core operations, Zambia, Panama, and eventually Argentina and Peru as well. Thank you.

Hi, Marcio. Thank you for that question.

We'll try and cover all of that. Firstly, on costs to restart for the full possibility of restart in Panama, look, I think it's, again, we're following a process in Panama that will be governed by the president and by the government of Panama.

It requires transparency and engagement, and that is our focus. The stockpile restart, as we spoke about there, I think there's a good amount of disclosure there to paint that picture.

In terms of restart beyond that, it's really around working capital deployment, and will depend on the condition in the plant. We've been doing a lot of work in that preservation and safe management to make sure that areas are in good condition.

Certainly we've looked after the big major assets really well, the mills, the major elements, rope shovels, and so on. There will be work to do on small-bore piping, on reticulation, pumping, these kind of elements.

Getting to grips with that is the major area in the plant. Then working capital of getting suppliers in Panama reestablished, credit terms around their employees, local Panamanians coming to work, and so on, is where the major costs.

That's potentially sort of $300 to $500 million in that range. How much of that is borne out in the stockpiles versus a restart down the track, we'll have to come to bear.

In terms of the power plant and its restart, it's really been pretty neutral because it's selling power into the grid, but the fuel costs at the moment is at a higher level, and so generally it comes out roughly neutral. We haven't seen any large major capex in that area.

Our main focus was on the boiler and making sure that that was in good condition. It was nitrogen-filled, and there were some areas where we did some work on the sootblowers, erosion on the sootblowers that was present, but that wasn't major in terms of capital work.

That's the kind of level of work that went into it. I think, by and large, the teams have done a fantastic job of looking after that asset, and you see that in terms of the ramp-up that we've seen on Unit 2.

We're now switching over to Unit 1. It's already in hot commissioning, as we stated, and we're working through that unit.

On Las Cruces and that sale, maybe, Ryan, if you take over from there on that question around asset sales and other operations.

Sure. Hi, Marcio.

We're pleased to conclude the Las Cruces sale in Q4. Obviously, that had been in the mix for a long time, to have that completed is pleasing: one, because it further simplifies our portfolio; two, it removes the $30 million of care and maintenance costs per year that we were bearing; and three, allows that project to be developed under a new owner for the benefit of the team there, for the benefit of Andalusia and Spain more broadly.

Beyond that, we're not proactively looking to sell any of our other assets, but of course, when it comes to some of our smaller assets, we'll always assess what makes sense for shareholders. We're pleased that at Guelb we see strong EBITDA driven by the gold price, and maybe referencing a question that Chris asked earlier, why we see our cost guidance increase through the next couple of years, part of that is just because Guelb is becoming purely a gold mine, where therefore don't get the byproduct credits as a byproduct, we just get them in as additional revenue.

We don't see it in our C1 numbers, but we certainly see the benefit of Guelb in our cash flows. Then lastly on Çayeli, that's been one of the real success stories in First Quantum over the last 12 months in terms of the extension to the mine life.

We're pleased that both those assets are part of the portfolio, but as other people externally express interest, we'll always make an assessment as to what serves our shareholders best.

Thank you, operator, and hello, Tristan, Rudi, and Ryan. On Taca Taca, you noted that there'll be a feasibility study update in Q1 of this year.

Do we expect that will be filed in Q1 2026? Then are there any changes to the scope of any aspects at all of the project that will be part of that updated TR?

Hi, Lawson. Thanks for the question.

Look, Taca Taca remains a strong project on its own merits, and we're seeing that the investment climate in Argentina is really developing. The reason for the technical report now, and we expect it later this month inside Q1, is part of the application for RIGI.

As you point out, they're painting a clear picture of the engineering study for what the project can look like. Beyond that, in terms of scope and otherwise, I wouldn't want to steal from that report and the impact of that, but there isn't any major sort of change in scope or otherwise.

It remains a robust project that extends on beyond 40 years, and with inferred resources, towards 70 years. It continues to be a project that will in the first 10 years deliver very strong copper production, and then after 10 years, there's a good reason for expansion at that point in time.

That is consistent with the previous technical report that put out. This is really an update that gives clarity around capital, around the development pathway, and paints pretty clearly what is an asset that is one of the strongest potential projects for copper in the world in a region now that's attracting a high level of interest in terms of investment.

Fantastic. If I could ask one more question, it would just be on the Kansanshi stream that you guys signed in August.

That's worked really well. It's done a lot to shore up the balance sheet.

Now that your debt metrics have improved and are continuing to improve, how do you think about prioritizing the buyback of the 30% interest in that, particularly in light of the higher gold price?

Thanks, Lawson. That's a great question.

Ryan, do you want to take that one?

Sure. Look, we liked the stream from a financial perspective when we entered into it, but we also liked it from a structural perspective: the fact that it was equity rather than debt, the fact that the copper price we get paid will increase over time, and most importantly that there was a buyback option we were able to embed into it.

Lawson, we still have to make more progress on deleveraging. There are leverage thresholds that we have to meet in order to exercise that buyback option.

We don't expect to meet those in 2026, but certainly as we come into 2027, we hope to be in a position to exercise initially the 20% buyback, and ultimately the second buyback, which is for an incremental 10%.

Hi, good morning, Tristan and team. Thanks for taking my question.

I just wanted to get a little bit more color on the question Marcio asked because I was going to ask that as well. The restart costs for the entire project, I know you don't want to get ahead of yourself, but it sounded like you were saying around $300 to $500 million total, and would that include the $230 to $280 that you just announced, or would that be additional?

Anita, we don't want to get ahead of ourselves. It's important to follow the pathway outlined by government, and there is a headline on that in terms of the president announcing that beyond the environmental audit coming back in April, but we'll have to assess those next steps and the timing from there, and it will require engagement, it requires transparency, and with the broader population in Panama, and that's our prime focus.

In terms of that capital and those indications, yes, the stockpile processing would net off against that, the $300 to $500 would include the $250, $280, yeah.

Okay. Then just a question on the $12 to $12.50 per tonne in processing costs.

Could you help frame that in dollars per pound? Does that include your G&A and TCRCs?

I understand there'll be some non-cash components because this ore has already been mined, but I'm just looking for sort of the cash component of what it would be in dollars per pound.

Ryan, do you have that to hand? I don't have that to hand.

Sure. We expect it to be around $2.19 per pound from a unit cost perspective.

What we would expect is at the moment we're incurring around $15 to $17 million in PNSM costs at Cobre Panama. Once we receive formal approval for the stockpiles, we would expect to produce around 70,000 tonnes of copper, and the sales from that would contribute towards the PNSM and other environmental-related activities that are ongoing at site, and we would end the year broadly cash-neutral at Cobre Panama.

Thank you. Just a follow-up on Cobre Panama and around the operational readiness and some of the comments Rudi made at the site visit last year.

If you do get approvals to start treating these stockpiles, does that change the operational readiness for the eventual restart? Obviously, I understand these two are two separate processes, but can you actually switch between the processing trains and ultimately be able to restart the entire plant once that decision comes much quicker than previously expected?

Thanks, Ian. Our focus on the stockpile restart will be environmental, and that is removing that material that does have some acid rock drainage elements, and pushing that through one circuit of the process plant at Cobre Panama.

Our focus is around that. We do have the opportunity to cycle through the trains, and I think that's useful in terms of ensuring good preservation and safe management practices.

The common areas obviously are needed for one or for three trains, so that's the cleaner circuit, the columns, the concentrate areas, and so on, are needed for, and most importantly, the cyclone plant for the tailings facility. Again, the focus will be environmental, and the cyclone plant gives us the opportunity to produce the sands that are needed at the tailings dam in order to ensure that we can deal with erosion and so on that's built up over the last 2 years.

That's the focus, but having the plant in a condition that's able to run on one train solidly and cycle through the trains, I think is overall good in terms of ensuring the ability of the plant to start up well in the event that we get to that.

Great. Then just a follow-up on Taca Taca, just Ryan's comments around the balance sheet and I guess the priority to de-gear the balance sheet and your comments around buy versus build, Tristan.

Is ultimately the sort of options around funding when you get to that decision, when you look at the balance sheet and decide whether, I guess, if you funded alone or you consider a stake sale, obviously the value will be one option to consider, but do you actually think of sort of Argentina as sort of from a risk mitigation perspective it would make sense to sell, or just trying to think how you would think about the funding options at that stage once you get to that?

Thanks, Ian. Look, again, the reason to be progressing the technical report is it's part of the RIGI process, and that's important.

There's some deadlines around that, and we're conscious of those. It also underlines the opportunities when we come to looking at funding options.

Again, our priorities is on Cobre Panama, and we spelled that out very clearly in terms of what our focus is this year, and on debt reduction before we would be ready in getting the balance sheet into the right position. In terms of progressing the project on its own merits, if I put those two elements aside and just look at the project and progress it on its own merits is appropriate.

That is, push forward, lodge the RIGI application, get the 43-101 out, which is the pathway for RIGI application, look at options around financing, what could be done. The market is looking at Argentina more, and there's opportunity in that in terms of making progress on that.

Again, we have a clear milestones there around the balance sheet and around Cobre Panama that lead into that. In terms of broader opportunities in the business to make Argentina happen, we'll look through options with partnership.

We said that publicly before. There's a number of tools in the toolkit in terms of looking at, and we use those, for example, at Kansanshi on the gold stream.

We've been deploying those tools. Really this is about making sure that Taca Taca on its own merits begins to stand as a project, which we believe it is, which is really worth looking at, and stands up very well compared to any of the other projects out there for copper development in the near future.

Thanks. Good morning, guys.

Thanks for squeezing me in. A couple of quick ones, if I may.

Just first on Cobre Panama, Tristan, your disclosure referenced support at 75% to 80% in the communities around the mine. Can you perhaps speak to sort of the broader country perspective, particularly in Panama City, just what your metrics are showing you, and maybe where some of the historical opposition is, Suntracs, the NGOs, those sorts of things?

Thanks.

Thanks, Dalton. That's very much a focus of our activities in Panama.

Broader support for the mine is around 50%, 55%. That's been steady at that level for some time now.

We see that a key element is really around transparency and engagement as to what the process from here looks like and walking through clear pathways. What we are seeing is a huge amount of curiosity.

Last year there were some 241,000 engagements one-to-one between people of Panama, our employees, our advocates, our people that are speaking directly to community. In those, what we hear is a lot of curiosity about the mine, its place.

We know, for example, discussion in Panama on the interconnector between Panama and Colombia, and that's a big power line and connection really to connect all the way the grid from North America through Mexico and into Costa Rica and Panama for the first time to connect across Latin America to South America. That's a huge interconnector for the continent and underlines the impact that electricity can provide in terms of uplifting communities and uplifting standards of living and provide the opportunity for things like data centers, modern technology, and opportunity in employment to come through.

Of course, interconnectors and electricity require copper, and it's that debate with society around responsibly and in an environmental and with strong biodiversity program and community programs that's important now in terms of Panama. Again, we're at probably 50%, 55% in the broader community.

We'd like to see that lifted up, and what we're seeing is a level of curiosity to understand the mine and understand how Panama can play into what is a global theme.

Thanks, Carly, and thank you, everybody, for joining the call. We're looking forward to a strong 2026.

I hope you have a great day. Thank you.