Royal Gold Analyst and Investor Day June 3, 2016 Cautionary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Royal Gold Analyst and Investor Day June 3, 2016 Cautionary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Royal Gold Analyst and Investor Day June 3, 2016 Cautionary Statement This presentation contains certain forwardlooking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forwardlooking statements
Cautionary Statement
2
This presentation contains certain forward‐looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward‐looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the projections and estimates contained herein and include, but are not limited to: expected gold equivalent ounce production in the March 2016 quarter and beyond; production, cost, reserve and mine life estimates and forecasts from the operators of the Company’s royalty and stream properties; reserves and resources, construction progress and projected start‐up dates at the Cortez Crossroads, Rainy River and Wassa and Prestea projects; anticipated growth in the volume of metals subject to the Company’s royalty and stream interests; the impact of exchange rates on the Company’s full year effective tax rate; adequacy of liquidity; sources and uses of capital; projected cash balances and leverage amounts; statements concerning the Company’s dividend rates and market valuation; analyst valuations with and without value for Mount Milligan; return on investment expectations; statements concerning continued operation of Mount Milligan regardless of Thompson Creek’s financial situation; and statements or estimates from operators of properties where we have royalty and stream interests regarding the timing of development, construction and commencement of production, or their projections of steady, increasing or decreasing production once in operation. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these forward‐looking statements include, among others: the risks inherent in construction, development and
- peration of mining properties, including those specific to new mines being developed and operated in foreign countries; changes in gold, silver,
copper, nickel and other metals prices; performance of and production at the Company’s properties; decisions and activities of the Company’s management; unexpected operating costs; decisions and activities of the operators of the Company’s royalty and stream properties; changes in
- perators’ mining and processing techniques or royalty calculation methodologies; resolution of regulatory and legal proceedings (including with Vale
regarding Voisey’s Bay); unanticipated grade, geological, metallurgical, environmental, processing or other problems at the properties; inaccuracies in technical reports and reserve estimates; revisions by operators of reserves, resources, mineralization or production estimates; changes in project parameters as plans of the operators are refined; the results of current or planned exploration activities; discontinuance of exploration activities by
- perators seeking additional financing from the Company or third parties; economic and market conditions; variations between operators’ production
estimates and our estimates of net GEOs; operations on lands subject to aboriginal rights; the ability of operators of development properties to finance construction to project completion and bring projects into production and operate them in accordance with feasibility studies; challenges to the Company’s royalty interests, or title and other defects in the Company’s royalty properties; errors or disputes in calculating royalty payments or stream deliveries, or payments or deliveries not made in accordance with royalty or stream agreements; the liquidity and future financial needs of the Company; the impact of future acquisitions and royalty and stream financing transactions; adverse changes in applicable laws and regulations; litigation; and risks associated with conducting business in foreign countries, including application of foreign laws to contract and other disputes, environmental laws, enforcement and uncertain political and economic environments. These risks and other factors are discussed in more detail in the Company’s public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Statements made herein are as of the date hereof and should not be relied upon as of any subsequent date. The Company’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future performance. The Company disclaims any
- bligation to update any forward‐looking statements.
Endnotes located on page 71.
June 3, 2016
3
Our Team, Agenda
Strategy
Tony Jensen, President & CEO
Transactions
Bill Heissenbuttel, VP Corporate Development
Capitalization
Stefan Wenger, CFO & Treasurer
Evaluation
Mark Isto, Vice President Operations
Protection
Bruce Kirchhoff, VP General Counsel & Corporate Secretary
Measurement
Karli Anderson, VP Investor Relations
June 3, 2016
(effective July 1, 2016)
4
Our Team
Royal Gold (Canada)
Alistair Baker, Director, Business Development
RGLD Gold AG
Jason Hynes, Director of Business Development and Global Sales
Royal Gold, Inc.
Randy Shefman, Associate General Counsel
June 3, 2016
5
Board of Directors
Left to right: Jamie Sokalsky, Independent Director; Kevin McArthur, Independent Director; Gordon Bogden, Independent Director; Craig Haase, Independent Director; William Hayes, Independent Director and Chairman of the Board; and Ronald J. Vance, Independent
- Director. Not pictured is Chris M.T. Thompson, Independent Director.
June 3, 2016
6
Royal Gold Evolution
RGLD Share Price Trailing 12 month revenue
Oil and Gas Exploration Oil and Gas Exploration
Gold Operating Company Precious Metals Royalty Company Royalty and Streaming Company
20 40 60 80 100 120 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 6/11/81 6/11/82 6/11/83 6/11/84 6/11/85 6/11/86 6/11/87 6/11/88 6/11/89 6/11/90 6/11/91 6/11/92 6/11/93 6/11/94 6/11/95 6/11/96 6/11/97 6/11/98 6/11/99 6/11/00 6/11/01 6/11/02 6/11/03 6/11/04 6/11/05 6/11/06 6/11/07 6/11/08 6/11/09 6/11/10 6/11/11 6/11/12 6/11/13 6/11/14 6/11/15
RGLD Revenue (TTM) RGLD Price
Pipeline/Cortez (1993) Royal Resources (1981) Peñasquito (2006) Andacollo (2009) Pueblo Viejo (2015) Troy (2004) Mount Milligan (2010)
June 3, 2016
7
Royal Gold Vision & Strategy
We create long term value by providing leverage and optionality to gold price and reserve upside by:
- Providing a portfolio of assets in some of the best gold districts in the world
- Maintaining a fixed cost structure
- Capital allocation discipline
Gold Focused Pay a Growing and Sustainable Dividend Invest at the Troughs and be Patient at the Top Reinvest Free Cash Flow in Long Lived Properties Be the Most Valuable, Not Necessarily the Largest
June 3, 2016
8
Portfolio of Assets
Portfolio by Metal
85% of Revenue from Gold in the First 9 Months of Fiscal 2016
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 9 mths 2016 Gold Silver Other
June 3, 2016
9
Portfolio of Assets
Distribution of Geography
80% of Revenue from Canada, Chile, US & Mexico in First 9 Months of Fiscal 2016
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 9 mths 2016 US Canada Chile Dominican Republic Mexico Africa Australia Other
June 3, 2016
10 Gross Revenue $USD
Andacollo Mount Milligan Voisey's Bay Peñasquito Robinson
Golden Star
Taparko
Pueblo Viejo
Cortez
$0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 $250,000,000 $300,000,000 $350,000,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 First 3 quarters FY04: Cortez/Pipeline was 88% of revenue FY10: Taparko was 24% of revenue FY07: Peñasquito was 41% of total assets, not producing yet, startup risk FY12: Andacollo was 24% of revenue FY15: Mount Milligan was 22% of net revenue
Cornerstone Properties generate cash flow that lead to more diversification
Portfolio of Assets
Cornerstone Properties
June 3, 2016
11
80% of our portfolio asset value is in mines with reserve life >15 years,1 including:
Portfolio of Assets
Current Value Drivers
June 3, 2016
Pueblo Viejo, 20 years Mount Milligan, 21 years Andacollo, 20 years
12
Portfolio of Assets
Life of Mines
80% of our portfolio asset value is in mines with reserve life >15 years,1 including:
June 3, 2016 5 10 15 20 25
Mt. Milligan Andacollo Voisey's Bay Pueblo Viejo Cortez Canadian Malartic Rainy River Peñasquito Leeville Robinson Golden Star Holt Mulatos
Years in production since we've owned it Years of remaining mine life
Years
2
$1,000 $1,100 $1,200 $1,300 $1,400 $1,500 $1,600 $1,700 $1,800 $1,900
13
- Mt. Milligan II
Phoenix Wassa and Prestea Andacollo Stream
We raised money near the post‐financial crisis high in the gold price, then deployed capital near the trough
- Mt. Milligan I
Spot Gold Price in US Dollars Pueblo Viejo RGLD Equity Raise at $1773 gold Rainy River
Capital Allocation
Opportunistic Capital Deployment
June 3, 2016
$0.00 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $0.90 $1.00
RGLD GG FNV SLW OR AEM ABX NEM HL ELD PAAS
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80
15 straight years of dividend increases Dividend increased in calendar 2016 to $0.92 per share 29% payout ratio of operating cash flow in FY20151 21% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) since 2001 Equates to 1.6% annual yield (May 31, 2016)
14
Annual Dividends Paid Per Share Calendar Years Dividend Yield2
Capital Allocation
Returning Capital to Shareholders
June 3, 2016
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 SLW FNV RGLD
RGLD share count unchanged since 2012
15
Millions of Common Shares Outstanding
We have demonstrated positive stewardship of shareholder capital Our share count is a fraction of our peers, and nearly unchanged since Oct 2012
Capital Allocation
Disciplined Use of Equity
$0.00 $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.50 SLW FNV RGLD Operating Cash Flow Per Share1,2
June 3, 2016
Assets representing 80% of revenue in the quarter ended March 30, 20161
5 10 15 20 25 $‐ $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 Millions Initial investment Cumulative net revenue through March 30, 2016 Estimated remaining mine life
16
Estimated Years of Remaining Reserves
* Includes proceeds from sale of the Andacollo Royalty; see Andacollo Stream
*
Long Term Value Creation
Investment Returns and Thesis
June 3, 2016
17
Long Term Value Creation
Gold Reserve Optionality and Growth
Organic growth represents reserve optionality ~20% growth in attributable gold reserves after acquisition
June 3, 2016
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Gold price
Attributable Gold Ounces (millions) Equity Reserve Growth Acquired Reserves $Au (EOY)
18
Long Term Value Creation
Gold Reserve Waterfall
June 3, 2016
Organic growth represents reserve optionality Organic growth largely offsets consumption
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 2005 Reserves Acquisitions Depletion Growth 2015 Reserves Attributable Gold Ounces (millions)
‐$4,000 ‐$2,000 $0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 Total capital invested to date Revenue to Date Estimated Value of 7.3Moz Net Equity Reserves * $1250 gold, at 80% recovery
19
$3.5B
In Millions of $USD Last 12 months
$2.0B $7.3B Consolidated investments have paid back ~60% of investment to date Indicative simple return of ~3X investment
Long Term Value Creation
Return on Investment Expectations
June 3, 2016
RGLD total return outperformed S&P 500 Total Return & Gold Price since 2000
20
Percentage Total Return
Long Term Value Creation
Historical Performance
‐500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 RGLD Total Return Gold Price in US Dollars % Change S&P 500 Total Return Level % Change
Source: YCharts
June 3, 2016
0x 5x 10x 15x 20x 25x 30x 35x 40x May‐11 Aug‐11 Nov‐11 Feb‐12 May‐12 Aug‐12 Nov‐12 Feb‐13 May‐13 Aug‐13 Nov‐13 Feb‐14 May‐14 Aug‐14 Nov‐14 Feb‐15 May‐15 Aug‐15 Nov‐15 Feb‐16 May‐16
Trading at a substantial discount to last 5‐year average price/cash flow1
21
Long Term Value Creation
Historical Valuation
Last 5 year average 24x Cash Flow
June 3, 2016
Source: YCharts
22
Long Term Value Creation
Mount Milligan Investment
Lien Rankings1
RGLD Investment Net revenue
June 3, 2016
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Revenue RGLD Investment In Millions of $USD $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Street Consensus NAV of Mount Milligan net of stream2 Principal Secured Notes
Consensus value after senior secured bonds ~$800M
Equipment Financing ($59M) Senior Secured Bonds ($314M currently) Royal Gold – Au in concentrate Royal Gold – Stream Unsecured Bonds ($517M)
Peñasquito
23
- First quartile of worldwide production costs
- 21 year mine life
- Located in British Columbia, Canada
- Appeals to gold or copper production
- Royal Gold’s interest is secured
Mount Milligan – Thompson Creek, Canada
Long Term Value Creation
Mount Milligan Attributes
June 3, 2016
Creativity in deal structure Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Incentives that foster discipline and align with shareholders
24
Royal Gold’s Competitive Advantages
June 3, 2016
Creativity Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Alignment with shareholders
25
Bill Heissenbuttel
Vice President Corporate Development
June 3, 2016
26
Creativity
Our Investment Criteria
Main criteria for investment:
- Resource optionality
- Metal price optionality
Complement our existing portfolio
- Exposure to meaningful multi‐cycle cash flow allows reinvestment in the business
and supports shareholder returns
Successful acquisitions meet our criteria and consider the requirements of
- ur counterparties
- Each acquisition has unique features that achieve this aim
- Asset Quality
- Counterparty
- Country
June 3, 2016
Why we like Pueblo Viejo:
- Tier 1 asset by any measure (>1 Moz/year on 100% basis, <$700/oz AISC)1
- Long‐life asset with significant potential for resource conversion
- Quality operator
Unique considerations:
- JV ownership structure
- Pre‐existing project finance facility
- Silver circuit ramp‐up
- Declining grade profile over the life of the mine
What Barrick required:
- Maximize cash upfront for debt reduction
- Non-debt treatment
- Maintain exposure to metal prices
- No amendment to debt or JV arrangements
27
Creativity
Case Study # 1 – Pueblo Viejo
June 3, 2016
Timeline
- Identified as an attractive opportunity in 2013 and discussions on and off
- Two‐phase competitive process started April, 2015; transaction announced
August 5, 2015
Exhaustive due diligence process
- Multi‐disciplinary team formed:
- Technical: metallurgy/processing (2), reserves(2), exploration, mining, infrastructure,
environmental/social/permitting
- Legal: counsel from United States, Dominican Republic, Canada, Cayman Islands and
Barbados
- Political: consultant with extensive Dominican experience
- Full access to electronic dataroom
- Site visit by the due diligence team and CEO
- Project model created with extensive sensitivity analysis to reflect due diligence
conclusions
28
Creativity
Case Study # 1 – Pueblo Viejo
June 3, 2016
Unique structure developed to address ownership and distributions:
29
Creativity
Case Study # 1 – Pueblo Viejo
June 3, 2016
Collection account a key feature:
- Account is funded 2 quarters in advance
- Delivery obligations to Royal Gold are senior to distributions to Barrick
- All dividends/distributions to Barrick routed through account
- Stress tested for various commodity prices, tax levels and operating and capital
costs to ensure Royal Gold and Barrick’s interests are aligned
Other features included to reduce risk: Fixed 70% silver recovery component Increased ongoing payment Designed for optimum coverage ratio of ~2:1
- Spot price payment rises from 30% to 60% to accommodate potentially increased
- perating costs associated with lower grade in later years
Stream right-sized for the project
- Project cash flows stress‐tested for material changes to assumptions
- End result is an innovative structure that met Barrick requirements and mitigates
- ngoing risk to Royal Gold
30
Creativity
Case Study # 1 – Pueblo Viejo
June 3, 2016
Why we like Rainy River:
- High‐quality project in a mining-friendly jurisdiction
- Long-life asset with significant exploration potential
- Low costs of operation expected
Unique considerations:
- Development project
- Existing indebtedness at the corporate level
What New Gold required:
- Committed capital to coincide with development spending
- Non-debt treatment
- Maintain exposure to metal prices and exploration upside
- Work within bank facility and indenture covenant structures
31
Creativity
Case Study # 2 – Rainy River
June 3, 2016
Timeline
- Identified as an attractive opportunity in 2013
- Two‐phase competitive process started April, 2015; transaction announced July
20, 2015
Exhaustive due diligence process
- Multi‐disciplinary team formed:
- Technical: processing, reserves/resources, exploration, underground/open pit mining,
construction, environmental/social/permitting, title
- Full access to electronic dataroom
- Site visit by the due diligence team
- Project model created to reflect due diligence conclusions
32
Creativity
Case Study # 2 – Rainy River
June 3, 2016
Stream terms addressed New Gold’s objectives:
- Advance payment in tranches, with second payment due upon reaching 60%
development threshold
- Stream step‐down to provide continued exposure to resource upside
Terms protecting Royal Gold’s interest include:
- Evidence of sufficient liquidity to complete development prior to payment of
second tranche
- Restrictions on additional debt and liens until return of our advance payment
- Security over a collection account
End result protected Royal Gold’s interest while providing New Gold cost‐ effective flexibility to continue development at Rainy River
33
Creativity
Case Study # 2 – Rainy River
June 3, 2016
34
JV structure between Contago Ore, Inc. (CORE) and Royal Gold under which Royal Gold can earn a 40% interest by spending $30 million by the end of 2018 Following completion of the 40% earn‐in, Royal Gold has a drag‐along right on
- ne‐third of CORE’s remaining 60% in the event Royal Gold sells its interest
Royal Gold acquired a 3% NSR on Tetlin lease ground and 2% NSR on claims located by CORE since July 2012 for $6 million Unique and efficient exploration and project management structure with JV managed by Royal Gold The area under agreement covers 744,000 acres (leases and claims)
June 3, 2016
Creativity
Case Study # 3 – Tetlin
We are very open and creative to make opportunities work, but not all do:
- Short‐life, high‐cost assets
- Capped streams
- Streams or royalties with full buy‐backs
- Unfunded development projects/caps
- Certain jurisdictions
Applying our investment criteria consistently is key to generating long‐term value
35
What Doesn’t Work
June 3, 2016
36
Competition
Number of companies in our sector little changed over the last few years
June 3, 2016
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Royal Gold Franco Nevada Silver Wheaton AuRico Metals Abitibi Royalties Virginia Mines Callinan Royalties XDM Royalty Premier Royalty Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corp Global Royalty Corp Gold Royalties Corporation Lumina Royalty Sandstorm Metals and Energy Sandstorm Gold Gold Wheaton Americas Bullion Silverstone Resources International Royalty Battle Mountain Gold Exploration Altius Anglo Pacific Osisko Royalties Orion Triple Flag Maverix
Average is 11 companies
Number of Companies
Creativity
- Listening to the counterparty
- Customizing a solution to their issues
- Drawing from credit oriented project finance experience
37
Competitive Advantage
June 3, 2016
Creativity Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Alignment with shareholders
38
Stefan Wenger
Chief Financial Officer
June 3, 2016
39
Date Item ($USD millions) March 31, 2016 Undrawn Revolver $350.0m March 31, 2016 Working Capital $151.0m March 31, 2016 Total Available Liquidity $501.0m Strong and Growing Operating Cash Flow Fiscal 3Q Operating Cash Flow Increased 27% from the December quarter $66.1m Near‐Term Conditional Commitments Existing conditional commitments at Rainy River and Golden Star expected to be funded primarily through cash flow from
- perations (net of $20m payment to GSR
in April 2016) $125m
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Conservative Balance Sheet
June 3, 2016
Strong banking partners
- HSBC, Scotia, CIBC, BAML and GS
Current drawn interest rate of LIBOR +2.25%
- Declines to LIBOR +1.75% at a net
leverage ratio below 2X
Total capacity of $650 million; matures in March 2021 $300 million drawn at March 31 leaving $350 million of undrawn capacity Expect to maintain cash balance of $100 million
40 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 Millions
Historical Use of Credit Facility
Outstanding Available
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Credit Facility Evolution
June 3, 2016
March 31 Working Capital, $151 Wassa Prestea, $50
Revolver Availability at March 31,2016, $350 Operating Cash Flow
$0 $1,000 All values in $US millions Sources of Cash Uses of Cash
Strong Operating Cash flow driving steadily declining leverage and increased liquidity Adjusted TTM Operating Cash flow of $220.6 million Expected FY 2017 net debt/EBITDA leverage ratio
- f less than 2X
Modest level of committed investments:
- Rainy River ($75M);
- Wassa and Prestea
Underground ($50M)
41
Estimated FY2017 Sources and Uses
Golden Star, $45
Disciplined Capital Allocation
FY 2017 Sources and Uses
June 3, 2016
Rainy River, $75
March 31 Working Capital, $151 Wassa Prestea, $50
Revolver Availability at March 31,2016, $350 Operating Cash Flow
$0 $1,000 All values in $US millions Sources of Cash Uses of Cash
42
Estimated FY2017 Sources and Uses
Golden Star, $45
Disciplined Capital Allocation
FY 2017 Sources and Uses
June 3, 2016
Rainy River, $75
Good access to additional capital for accretive acquisitions if necessary:
- Financing approach focused
- n minimizing cost of capital
and supporting per share metrics
- Regular evaluation of all
available financing alternatives and internal capital tower
- Comfortable with aggregate
leverage in the range of 3X
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
43
Many of our properties are amongst the lowest cost in the industry, with a weighted average gross margin of 55%1 inclusive of stream payments
Average gross margin 55%
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Portfolio Quality
June 3, 2016
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Business Segments
44
Golden Star, $135
Royalty Segment Passive Income US ~40% of revenue
Streaming Segment Metals Trading Switzerland ~60% of revenue
Funds new streaming transactions Funds royalty investments, corporate expenses, dividends and debt service
June 3, 2016
The principal objectives of the sales policy are to:
- Achieve an average sales price that approximates
the average spot price during each reporting period
- Maintain physical inventory in allocated form
- No speculation
- Once allocated, each gold and silver delivery is sold
- ver the period until the next delivery is expected
based on average time between deliveries
- Wassa and Prestea – one delivery every 2 weeks
- Milligan – one delivery approximately every 3 weeks
- Andacollo – one delivery per month
- Pueblo Viejo – one delivery per quarter
- Physical inventory levels range from 15K to 25K
GEO’s at any given quarter end
- Inventory levels primarily driven by timing of
Milligan deliveries and size of Pueblo Viejo deliveries
45
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Sales Process and Inventory
June 3, 2016
Our low expenses reflect the scalability of our business and help safeguard
- ur low cost of capital for the long term
46
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 RGLD SG&A Expense (Annual)($m) RGLD Revenue (Annual)($m)
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Scalability
June 3, 2016
Higher cash flow per employee than Apple or Exxon
47
Disciplined Capital Allocation
Efficiency
June 3, 2016 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000
AAPL CFO Per Employee (Annual) RGLD CFO Per Employee (Annual) XOM CFO Per Employee (Annual)
Creativity Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Alignment with shareholders
48
Mark Isto
Vice President Operations
June 3, 2016
In a typical year:
49
Capital Allocation
Rigorous Due Diligence
100
- Inquiries
~20‐25 Desktop Evaluations 10‐15 Advanced Evaluations (data room) 5‐10 Due Diligence Efforts 4‐8
- Proposals
0‐5
- Completed Transactions
June 3, 2016
50
Section View
Main Peak North Peak
Due Diligence efforts cover technical, legal and commercial aspects of the proposed transaction Our technical assessment focuses on:
- Overall operational viability and project deliverability
- Gross income aspects of project (geology/resource
estimation/metallurgy/minability)
Assessment of the project and senior management teams ability to deliver Our analysis and ultimate valuation is focused on value drivers and risks of achieving outcomes that create impact for the operator and Royal Gold
Operating Expertise
Our Evaluation Process
June 3, 2016
51
Operating Expertise
Our Evaluation Process
Scope Due Diligence (define key value drivers, issues, define team members) Data Review (all team members review there areas)
Site Visit (technical, project/mine team assessment) Red Flag Review (determine if any “no go” issues have been defined)
Define Value Drivers and Risks (revise financial model based on team view of value drivers)
Stream Opportunity
Phase 1 Review (limited data, financial model development, strategic fit discussion)
Due Diligence Process
Dismiss
Requests Additional data Subject experts Output Financial model parameters, Comprehensive report, Board briefing Legal Commercial
June 3, 2016
52
Section View
Main Peak North Peak
Operating Expertise
Our Evaluation Process
Project Performance Risk – we capture expected project performance in the definition and assessment of Value Drivers
- Systematic approach
- Drives team member accountability
- Clearly communicates findings between team and management
Parameter Vendor Financial Model RGI Financial Model Risk Rating Prior to Mitigation Variance Range Basis of Assessment/Comments Responsibility
Ore Tonnage (t) XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Au Grade (g/t) XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Ag Grade (g/t) XXX XXX Low‐Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Cu Grade (%) XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Waste Tonnage XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Ore Processing Daily Mill Throughput (tpd) XXX XXX Low‐Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Au Recovery XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Ag Recovery XXX XXX High ‐X% ‐ X% Cu Recovery XXX XXX Moderate ‐X% ‐ X% Cu Concentrate Grade (%) XXX XXX Low ‐X% ‐ X% Risk Rating Low plus and minus variance typical for industry/no material schedule risk Low‐Moderate higher probability of a negative variance up to 5% Moderate higher probability of a negative variance up to 10%/schedule achievement possible with stringent management Moderate‐High higher probability of a negative variance up to 15% High higher probability of a negative variance up to >15%/unlikely schedule can be achieved Team Member 2 Definitions Open Pit Mining Team Member 1 Discussion of specific risks, method to include in financial model
Sample of the many of value drivers identified
June 3, 2016
Input Parameter Feasibility Study Comments on Work Completed and Maturity Ranking Open Pit Mining Overall Maturity Mining Rate Preliminary
Sinking rate not attainable, rescheduling required
Material Characteristics Final
Bulk Density/Swell Factor/Moisture Content
Final Geotechnical Design - Pit Slopes Preliminary
Geotechnical slope design not supported by full study. Preliminary work seems to support 60 degree slopes. Weak zones at contact. Additional work required. Development Drilling Core Logging
- Geotech Parameters
Detailed
Outside geotech firm supported data collection. Pit Slope Core Drilling
Detailed
Core drilling program completed Material Testing - Strength
Detailed
Testing completed Structural Analysis
Preliminary
Failure Analysis
Preliminary
Preliminary analysis complete, pending final report Hydrogeologic Model
Preliminary
Hydrogeology well understood. Dewatering model still under development. Wall Depressurization Analysis and Strategy
Preliminary
Assessment in progress
53
Completeness ‐ are studies for projects complete and developed to the standard defined – PFS or FS Systematically measure the project maturity, assess risks and determine financial model adjustments to mitigate risk.
Operating Expertise
Our Evaluation Process
June 3, 2016
Protecting Royal Gold’s interests through:
- Operational monitoring
- Metal delivery and royalty
payment verification
- Site visits
- Risk assessment
- Forecast/budget
development and planning
- Counterparty relationship
building
Operating Expertise
Our Monitoring Process
Stream/Royalty Monitoring (payment audits, technical/financial) Production Forecast Update Annual Site Visit
(Tier 1 Properties)
Annual Information (annual budgets, LOM, reserves) RGLD Budgets & Forecasts (plans and production documentation)
Stream/Royalty
Annual Cycle
Investment Period Monitoring (technical site visits, monthly, reports)
June 3, 2016 54
55
Reserve Update
2015 Reserves & Resources
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2014 2015 2014 2015 Million ozs
Total Portfolio Gold Resources
Prod & Dev Evaluation
M & I Inferred 22% 25%
Gold million ounces 85.9 17% 5.8 14% Silver million ounces 780 2% 44 193% GEO Basis (Au+Ag) million ounces 6.4 21% Copper million pounds 12,350 1% 201 3% Lead million pounds 3,732 ‐1% 74.8 ‐1% Zinc million pounds 10,259 ‐2% 208.8 ‐2% Nickel million pounds 1,780 132% 48.1 132% Cobalt million pounds 103 186% 2.8 180% Molybdenum million pounds 373 0% 4.3 0% GEO Basis (all metals) million ounces 7.3 18% Change Metal Units Reserves Reserves Royalty Equity Yr on Yr Change Yr on Yr
June 3, 2016
Attributable Reserves
56
Reserve Update
2015 Material Reserve Additions1
June 3, 2016
57
0.7 0.8 1.0 1.3 4.3 4.5 5.7 5.8 5.3 5.1 5.8 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 GE Ounces (millions) (Calendar years ended December 31)1
Gold Silver Other Metals
Reserve Update
Attributable Reserves
June 3, 2016
79% 8% 13% Calendar Year End 2015
Gold Silver Other
24% 19% 11% 7% 11% 4% 6% 16% 2% 2015 GEO Reserve by Property
Mt Milligan Andacollo Pascua Lama Penasquito Pueblo Viejo Voiseys Bay Nevada Other Precious Metals Base Metals and Other 58
Reserve Update
GEO Attributable Reserve Distribution1
June 3, 2016
7% 38% 9% 11% 31% 1% 3% 0% 2015 Year End GEO Reserves
USA Canada Mexico Central America South America Australia Africa Europe Dominican Republic
Our source of competitive advantage: operating experience/technical
- rientation has led to us to invest in some of the industry’s best quality,
longest‐lived assets
59
Competitive Advantage
June 3, 2016
Creativity Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Alignment with shareholders
60
Bruce Kirchhoff
Vice President, General Counsel
June 3, 2016
61
Governance and Oversight
Best Practices
June 3, 2016
Separate Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board Seven of eight directors are independent, including all members of the Audit and Finance Committee and the Compensation, Nominating and Governance Committee Significant Board refreshment since 2013 Significant director and executive officer stockholding requirements Majority voting in uncontested director elections Active stockholder engagement Stronger link between executive officer compensation and Company performance Anti‐hedging and anti‐pledging policies No perquisites and no excise tax gross‐ups for executive officers Continual monitoring of governance trends and best practices
62
Protecting Our Interests–Voisey’s Bay
We inherited the case when we acquired International Royalty Corporation in 2010 Two claims were alleged when the case was filed in 2009; six more were added in late 2014 The Voisey’s Bay royalty is a 3% Net Smelter Return (2.7% to our account)
- Royalty agreement allows deduction of “smelting and refining charges; penalties;
smelter assay costs and umpire assay costs; cost of freight and handling; marketing costs; insurance; customs duties; or mineral taxes or the like and export and import taxes or tariffs payable in respect of said concentrates”
June 3, 2016
Creativity Disciplined capital allocation Operating expertise Governance and oversight Alignment with shareholders
63
Karli Anderson
Vice President Investor Relations
June 3, 2016
Our approach to shareholder engagement
- Year‐round engagement
- Feedback loop: shareholders to management and board
- Continuous improvement approach
- Alignment of shareholder interests and executive compensation
Our measures of success:
- Total shareholder return (TSR)
- Financial strength
- Premium valuation relative to peers and to benchmarks(GDX, S&P, etc)
- Operating cash flow per share multiple
- Directly influences our cost of capital
- Counterparty relationships
- Financing partner of choice
64 June 3, 2016
Alignment with Shareholders
Approach and Success Factors
Short Term Financial / Operational Objectives:
- Operating cash flow multiple relative to GDX constituents
- Net GEO production
Individual Performance
- Line of sight objectives for each individual
65
Alignment with Shareholders
FY16 Performance Measures
Long Term
- Growth in annual net GEO production
- Percentile rank 1‐yr, 2‐yr, 3‐yr TSR vs. GDX constituents
Strategic Objectives:
- Acquisition & capital allocation
- Financial strength
- Ability to pay a growing dividend
- Revenue diversification
Measures designed to correspond to long term value creation
June 3, 2016
66
Royal Gold Strategy & Attributes
Royal Gold Attributes
- Creativity in deal structure
- Disciplined capital allocation
- Operating expertise
- Governance and oversight
- Alignment with shareholders
Gold Focused Pay a Growing and Sustainable Dividend Invest at the Troughs and be Patient at the Top Reinvest Free Cash Flow in Long Lived Properties Be the Most Valuable, Not Necessarily the Largest
June 3, 2016
Continued near‐term growth expected, driven by Pueblo Viejo and Rainy River1
Five Year Volume Pro-forma
67 June 3, 2016
200,000 220,000 240,000 260,000 280,000 300,000 320,000 FY2016 FY2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 Net GEOs1
0.0x 10.0x 20.0x 30.0x 40.0x 50.0x 60.0x RGLD Price to CFO Per Share (TTM) FNV Price to CFO Per Share (TTM) SLW Price to CFO Per Share (TTM) FNV average P/CF (LTM)
Royal Gold trading at a substantial discount to historical cash flow per share1
68
Compelling Valuation
June 3, 2016
RGLD average P/CF (LTM) SLW average P/CF (LTM) Value gap between historical (29x) and current (15x) RGLD multiple
69
Simple and efficient business model Straight forward strategy Portfolio of high quality, long lived assets
Growth embedded in current portfolio
Attractive returns, leveraged to price and reserve optionality
Disciplined capital allocation and processes Experienced and capable management and board
Compelling valuation
Compelling Investment
NASDAQ: RGLD
June 3, 2016
Endnotes
Many of the matters in these endnotes and the accompanying slides constitute forward looking statements and are subject to numerous risks, which could cause actual results to differ. See complete Cautionary Statement on page 2.
71
PAGE 12 PORTFOLIO OF ASSETS – CURRENT VALUE DRIVERS and PAGE 12 LIFE OF MINES, PAGE 57EQUITY RESERVES AND PAGE 58 NET GEO RESERVES 1 Based on reserves for year ended December 31, 2015 as reported by the operator. 2 Mulatos royalty is capped. Reflects estimated date that cap will be met. PAGE 14 CAPITAL ALLOCATION – RETURNING CAPITAL TO SHAREHOLDERS 1. Payout ratio of operating cash flow calculated as dividends paid divided by cash from operations for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. 2. Source is S&P Capital IQ. PAGE 15 CAPITAL ALLOCATION – DISCIPLINED USE OF EQUITY 1. Royal Gold’s operating cash flow for the period ended September 30, 2016 adjusted for the gain on the sale of the Andacollo royalty ($47.7 million). 2. Source for competitor operating cash flow per share is S&P Capital IQ. PAGE 16 CAPITAL ALLOCATION – INVESTMENT RETURNS 1. Mulatos royalty is capped. Reflects estimated date that cap on royalty at Mulatos will be met 2. IRR’S are historical. PAGE 17 RESERVE OPTIONALITY AND GROWTH
- 1. Reflects gross gold reserves on areas subject to our interest, net of depletion as reported by the operators of those mines.
PAGE 21 LONG TERM VALUE CREATION – HISTORICAL VALUATION 1. Source is Ycharts. PAGE 22 LONG TERM VALUE CREATION – MOUNT MILLIGAN 1. The information presented is a simplified view of agreements between Royal Gold (including Royal Gold’s wholly‐owned subsidiaries) and Thompson Creek Metals(and its subsidiaries) as well as with the bondholders. For additional information please see Royal Gold’s public filings with the SEC. 2. Based on the average calculated from reports from CIBC (January 14, 2016), RBC (February 25, 2016) and Scotiabank (February 25, 2016). PAGE 26 CASE STUDY #1 – PUEBLO VIEJO 1. See Barrick’s press release dated February 17, 2016. PAGE 45 PORTFOLIO QUALITY 1. Gross Margin calculated as average metal price for the period less operating or cash cost per unit, with the balance calculated as a percentage of that metal price. Based on data provided to us by the operators of these properties and/or public data. PAGE 56 RESERVES 1. See Royal Gold’s press release dated April 28, 2016. PAGE 68 FIVE YEAR VOLUME PRO‐FORMA 1. Volumes are Net Gold Equivalent Ounces (GEO’s). GEO’s are calculated as revenue divided by the average quarterly gold price per ounce of gold. The pro forma totals are based on estimates from the operators of the properties on which we have a royalty or streaming interest. Those estimates are subject to risks and uncertainties as detailed on slide 2. PAGE 69 COMPELLING VALUATION
- 1. Source is Ycharts for competitor multiples. Royal Gold’s operating cash flow multiple for FY2016 adjusted for the gain on the Andacollo royalty sales ($47.7 million).
Endnotes
June 3, 2016
1660 Wynkoop Street, # 1000 Denver, CO 80202-1132 303.573.1660 info@royalgold.com www.royalgold.com 1660 Wynkoop Street, # 1000 Denver, CO 80202-1132 303.573.1660 info@royalgold.com www.royalgold.com