SSRマイニング（SSRM）2026年第3四半期決算説明会：マリゴールドの成長進展に伴いAISC上昇

SSR Mining（NASDAQ/TSX: SSRM）の2026年第3四半期の金相当量生産量は10万4,000オンス近くとなった一方、コスト圧力を背景に連結総維持コスト（AISC）は1オンス当たり2,527ドルに上昇した。経営陣は通期の生産量ガイダンスを据え置いたものの、通期AISCについては従来の予想レンジ上限を約10%上回る水準で着地する見通しとなった。

主要なポイント

• 第3四半期の売上高は、10万7,000オンス近くの金相当量販売により4億4,800万ドルとなった。希薄化後1株当たり調整後純利益は0.64ドルだった。
• 連結生産量は金相当量で10万4,000オンス近くとなり、AISCは1オンス当たり2,527ドルだった。
• 経営陣は、特にマリゴールド鉱山を中心に第4四半期の好調が見込まれることから、通期の生産量は計画通りに推移していると述べた。ただし、通期のAISCはガイダンスレンジの上限を約10%上回る見通しとなった。
• 継続事業からのフリーキャッシュフローは、運転資本変動前で約1億1,100万ドル、運転資本変動後で600万ドルとなった。SSR Miningの第3四半期末時点の現金保有額は約16億ドル、無借金で、総流動性は22億ドルに達した。
• 2026年第1〜第3四半期累計（9カ月間）で、SSR Miningは5億3,000万ドル超を投じて1,700万株近くの自社株買いを実施した。再開された配当を含め、経営陣は株主還元利回りを約10%と試算している。
• マリゴールド鉱山の改訂版技術報告書では、460万オンスの鉱物埋蔵量、20年の可採年数、および2040年までの年間平均金生産量が20万オンスを超える見通しが示された。

主要財務データ

2026年第1〜第3四半期累計のフリーキャッシュフローは3億500万ドル近く（運転資本変動前は4億8,600万ドル）に達した。

事業および操業実績

マリゴールド

マリゴールド鉱山の第3四半期の金生産量は2万9,000オンスで、年初来累計生産量は9万8,000オンスとなった。AISCは1オンス当たり2,714ドルとなり、維持設備投資の増加や広範なコスト圧力を反映した。

経営陣は、第4四半期がマリゴールド鉱山にとって2026年で最も生産量の多い四半期になると見込んでいる。この増産予想は、ポンプ設備、カーボン吸着塔、調整池の改修に伴う浸出パッドの溶液流量増加、セル23Bでの鉱石積み上げの可能性、および在庫の取り崩しに依存している。経営陣は、この取り崩しを前提に、同鉱山の通期生産量ガイダンスレンジの下限である17万オンスを達成する計画を維持していることを確認した。

改訂されたマリゴールド鉱山の採掘計画では、埋蔵量は460万オンスとなり、20年の鉱山寿命（マインライフ）を支える。計画総生産量は前回の技術報告書から50%以上増加した。バッファロー・バレー（Buffalo Valley）の開発は2027年に開始される見通しで、初生産は2029年に計画されている。

クリップル・クリーク＆ビクター（CC&V）

CC&V鉱山では、AISCが1オンス当たり2,126ドルとなり、3万2,000オンス近くを生産した。年初来の累計生産量は9万8,000オンス近くに達した。同社は引き続き、埋蔵量への転換、鉱山寿命の延長、および長期的な生産機会の評価を行っている。

シービー

シービー鉱山では、AISCが1オンス当たり2,094ドルとなり、1万6,000オンス近くを生産した。実績には第2四半期から延期された選鉱プラントの保守作業が含まれている。年初来の累計生産量は3万9,000オンスとなり、年末までにこれ以上の計画保守は予定されていない。

サントイ鉱体での開発は高品位鉱床に到達し、第4四半期の増産を後押しすると見込まれる。経営陣は、品位が2027年には埋蔵量品位に近い水準に戻る見通しだと述べた。SSR Miningはまた、2030年代に向けた鉱山寿命延長の潜在的候補としてポーキー鉱床の評価を進めている。

プナ

プナ鉱山の第3四半期における銀生産量は170万オンス、AISCは1オンス当たり25.64ドルとなった。年初来9カ月間の累計生産量は510万オンス、AISCは1オンス当たり25.88ドルだった。

チンチラス鉱山での採掘鉱石量は計画を上回った。SSR Miningは剥土作業と潜在的な鉱床延長部を優先し、低コストな備蓄鉱石からの生産を先送りした。経営陣は、フェーズ8、可能性のあるフェーズ9、およびコルタデラス・プロジェクトについて、プナ鉱山の生産プロファイルを2030年代まで延長する機会と捉えている。

コンバース買収

SSR Miningは、ロックスモア・リソーシズおよび隣接するコンバース金プロジェクトの買収が年末までに完了すると見込んでいる。買収資金は手元資金から充当される。

経営陣は、コンバースが最終的に年間平均15万〜17万オンスの金生産に寄与すると試算している。2030年代初頭までは多額の開発支出が見込まれておらず、本買収が短期的なフリーキャッシュフローに与える影響は限定的である。買収完了後の主な作業には、インフィル掘削（補足ボーリング）、選鉱・冶金試験の確認、プラント設計、許認可関連調査などが含まれる。

経営陣のガイダンス

SSR Miningは通期の連結生産量見通しを据え置き、2026年を力強く締めくくると見込んでいる。第4四半期の増産は主にマリゴールド鉱山が牽引する見通しである。

通期のAISCは、従来のガイダンスレンジ上限を約10%上回る見込みとなった。経営陣はその増加分の約半分がプナ鉱山の採掘計画変更によるものだとしている。残りのコスト圧力は、主に金・銀価格に連動したロイヤルティの増加、軽油価格の高止まり、人件費、および消耗品のインフレに起因している。

同社の軽油ヘッジは、マリゴールド鉱山およびCC&V鉱山での消費量の約3分の2（全世界のエクスポージャーの約60%に相当）をカバーしていたが、第3四半期中に期限を迎えた。現行の価格水準に基づくと、経営陣はこれらのヘッジがなくなることで連結AISCが1オンス当たり100〜150ドル押し上げられる可能性があると試算している。SSR Miningは決算説明会の時点で、2027年向けの軽油ヘッジを設定していなかった。

リスクと注視点

• SSR Miningの全社エクスポージャーの約60%をカバーしていたヘッジが第3四半期に終了したことを受け、軽油価格の上昇は依然として主要なコストリスクとなっている。
• 人件費や専門職への報酬は、同社が従来予算編成で用いてきたインフレ想定を上回るペースで上昇している。
• 消耗品費、資材費、ロイヤルティ費用が引き続き操業コストを圧迫している。
• マリゴールド鉱山の通期生産目標の達成は、浸出パッド在庫の順調な取り崩しと溶液流量の増加にかかっている。
• マリゴールド鉱山の2027年の生産プロファイルは、採掘順序の見直しに伴う剥土作業の増加と鉱石の採掘時期の後ろ倒しによる影響を受ける見込みである。
• プナ事業では、ピルキタスにおける水管理および鉱さい集積場（テーリングダム）の閉山引当金の見積もり見直しに伴い、一時的な非現金費用を計上した。税引後4,350万ドルのこの費用はAISCには影響せず、調整後利益からも除外された。

アナリスト質疑応答の要点

アナリストらは、マリゴールド鉱山で予想される第4四半期の大幅な増産に注目した。経営陣は、この増産が第4四半期における鉱石積み上げの大幅な増加よりも、過去に積み上げた在庫と溶液流量の改善に大きく依存すると説明した。その後同鉱山は、2028年以降の増産を支えるため、2027年には剥土作業と採掘順序の見直しへと移行する方針である。

2027年のコストについて、経営陣は投資家に対し、より高いコスト想定を織り込んだマリゴールドおよびCC&Vの改訂版技術報告書を参照するよう促した。2027年の正式なガイダンスは、予算および軽油ヘッジの実施判断が確定した後の2月に発表される見通しである。

経営陣は、プナ鉱山の将来的な埋蔵量増加について、既存埋蔵量の微小な調整よりも、チンチラスの追加フェーズやコルタデラスからもたらされる可能性が高いと述べた。シービー鉱山では、ポーキー鉱床の開発推進とサントイ鉱床の延長に注力している。

資本配分について、経営陣はバランスシートの維持、社内成長投資、株主還元、規律あるM&Aのいずれも重要であり、厳格な優先順位を設けているわけではないと述べた。同社は追加の買収を急ぐ必要性を感じておらず、既存の開発パイプラインを踏まえると、別の大型開発プロジェクトの推進は現時点で望ましい次のステップではないとの見解を示した。

決算説明会 文字起こし全文

決算説明会の完全なトランスクリプト

経営陣による説明

Operator

Hello, everyone, and welcome to SSR Mining's Third Quarter 2026 Conference Call. This call is being recorded.

At this time, for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Alex Hunchak from SSR Mining. Please go ahead.

Alex Hunchak

Thank you, operator, and hello, everyone. Thank you for joining today's conference call to discuss SSR Mining's Third Quarter 2026 financial results.

Our consolidated financial statements have been presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. These financial statements have been filed on EDGAR and SEDAR, and they are also available on our website. There is an online webcast accompanying this call, and you will find the information to access the webcast on our corporate website. Please note that all figures discussed during the call are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated.

Today's discussion will include forward-looking statements, so please read the disclosures in the relevant documents. Additionally, we refer to non-GAAP financial measures during our discussion and in the accompanying slides. Please see our press release for information about the comparable GAAP measures.

Rod Antal, Executive Chairman, will be joined by Michael Sparks, Chief Financial Officer; and Bill MacNevin, EVP, Operations and Sustainability, on today's call.

I will now turn the line over to Rod.

Rodney Antal

Great. Thanks, Alex, and good afternoon to you all. I'm very pleased with the milestones our team achieved over the course of the third quarter, where our 4 operations delivered another stable quarter. We continued to deliver peer-leading capital returns. We also published a new technical report for Marigold that materially extended the life of mine. And finally, we enhanced our U.S. portfolio through a bolt-on strategic acquisition of Roxmore Resources that we announced.

A very busy and productive quarter that sets our company up for long-term success. Our consolidated production is on track for full year guidance with an expected strong fourth quarter, especially at Marigold. However, with the persistent pressures on cost, we now expect our full year all-in sustaining costs will be approximately 10% above the top end of guidance. There are 2 main drivers.

First, at Puna, we continue to actively see opportunities for mine life extension in the current operating areas as well as other targets we're advancing. Because of this, we made a conscious decision to prioritize ore extensions and stripping into Chinchillas, which led to a deferral of processing lower-cost stockpile ounces into the future. And second, we have not been immune to the industry-wide cost pressures, and Michael will provide more details on these drivers in the coming slides.

With the exit from Turkey now complete, our business is firmly established as an Americas-focused gold and silver producer, anchored by long-lived operations in the United States. As I mentioned, we announced 2 significant and positive updates in mid-October that further bolstered our U.S. platform. We released the updated life of mine plan for Marigold, showcasing a more than 50% increase in total production and an impressive 20-year reserve life.

Second, this paradigm shift for Marigold was complemented by the strategic and accretive acquisition of Roxmore Resources and its Converse Project, which is adjacent to the Marigold property. Separately, we continued to deliver best-in-class capital returns through the quarter. Over the first 9 months of 2026, we have repurchased nearly 17 million shares, returning more than $530 million. Coupled with our reinstated dividend, we have already delivered a capital returns yield of approximately 10% this year. As you can see, our business is in excellent shape and positioned to deliver a strong close to the year. We have a best-in-class balance sheet with more than $1.5 billion in cash that allows us to continue the peer-leading capital returns program.

As we look ahead, there are a couple of catalysts. First, we expect the Roxmore acquisition to close by year-end, delivering meaningful additions to our consolidated mineral resources and adding to our U.S. growth platform. Second, we are planning to begin development on Buffalo Valley project in 2027, while also advancing a number of exciting brownfields opportunities at both Puna and Seabee. We expect to be in a position to provide the market with more detail on our growth opportunities moving into next year.

With the opportunities ahead, let's talk more about our track record of creating value per share on Slide 4. Given all the news flow this year and particularly in light of last month's agreement to acquire the Converse Gold Project, it is worth highlighting our proven track record of meaningful value creation on a per share basis.

Over the last 2 years, we have delivered nearly a 250% increase in net asset value per share and a nearly 500% increase in cash flow per share. These metrics illustrate a powerful picture of discipline on how we run the business. The figures on this slide reflect successful execution across a number of initiatives. This includes accretive M&A, peer-leading capital returns and finally, successful exploration and resource development that has successfully increased reserves and extended mine life across the Americas assets.

As you can see on the top right of this page, we have repurchased nearly 37 million shares since 2021, including the almost 17 million shares I mentioned earlier this year. When it comes to M&A, it's important to remember that our Americas platform was built through disciplined transactions. The nearly $2 billion in free cash flow generated by Marigold, Seabee and Cripple Creek & Victor since acquisition has more than repaid their original acquisition consideration. And today, they represent nearly $6 billion in consensus NAV. This is a 10x return on these investments. And importantly, we continue to see significant growth potential ahead for the assets.

So with that in mind, let's turn on to Slide 5 and talk about the technical report at Marigold. A significant milestone for us was the publication of the Marigold technical report. This was the culmination of years of successful exploration and resource development efforts across the property. The Marigold complex now hosts 4.6 million ounces of mineral reserves, supporting a 20-year mine life and average annual production of more than 200,000 ounces of gold through 2040. The mine plan is more than 50% -- more than a 50% increase in total production against the prior technical report and importantly, features total production over the next 5 years that is directly aligned with our prior expectations.

Marigold now incorporates Buffalo Valley, where development is expected to commence later next year ahead of first production in 2029. By expanding the Marigold fleet and developing new leach pads for Buffalo Valley, we are able to support significant mine life extension and production growth at this core U.S. asset.

It also provides a strategic opportunity to modernize not only the fleet, but also how we operate the mine. Once we get through the initial stripping efforts over the next few years, it unlocks the ability to mine multiple ore faces at the same time, providing operating flexibility you would expect from an asset and an operation of this size and scale.

Let's turn on to Slide #6 and the Converse transaction. On October 13, we announced an agreement to acquire Roxmore Resources and its Converse Gold Project at an attractive valuation. This transaction represents a compelling opportunity to add a high-quality, multimillion ounce gold resource next door to our Marigold mine. We've been following Converse for some time and given its proximity to Marigold, we were able to leverage our knowledge of both the current operations and the new development at Buffalo Valley to inform our due diligence process.

We believe developing Converse with such close proximity to Marigold provides us a clear advantage with operating and financial efficiencies. Converse has the potential to add 150,000 to 170,000 ounces of gold on an average production basis, which complements the multi-decade Marigold mine life we just published. The transaction further reinforces the quality and scale of our platform in the United States and demonstrates our commitment to deliver accretive growth in our core jurisdictions. The acquisition will be funded from our existing cash position and is aligned with our disciplined capital allocation strategy. With no material development expected until early 2030s, the transaction will have no impact on our near-term free cash flow profile.

And I'm on to Slide 7 and how these 2 updates improve our U.S. platform. Including the recent update to the Marigold life of mine, our U.S. platform now hosts more than 7 million ounces of gold reserves and an additional 9 million ounces of resources. This significant reserve and resource base clearly reflects the multi-decade pathway ahead for our 2 U.S. assets. We'll continue to advance opportunities to deliver resource conversion and growth at both Marigold and Cripple Creek in the coming years.

In addition, this platform will now be enhanced by the forthcoming acquisition of the multimillion ounce Converse Project adjacent to Marigold. Once in production, we expect Converse has the potential to take our U.S. platform north of 450,000 ounces of annual gold production in the peak years.

And with that, over to you, Michael.

Michael Sparks

Thanks, Rod, and good afternoon, everyone. In the third quarter, we produced almost 104,000 gold equivalent ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of $2,527 per ounce. I want to walk you through the key drivers of our full year cost profile for 2026.

Beyond the Puna mine plan changes Rod described, which account for about half of the cost increase, the remaining AISC pressure comes from 3 key areas: higher royalty costs driven by elevated gold and silver prices, persistent diesel price pressure on our unhedged consumption and broader labor and consumable inflation. Our cost base is anchored by labor at approximately 1/3, followed by royalties and supplies at roughly 15% each. Fuel represents 10% to 15% and consumables account for another 10% to 12%. So these 5 categories collectively represent approximately 85% of our operating costs.

On diesel, our 2026 hedge program covers approximately 2/3 of consumption at Marigold and CC&V or roughly 60% of our total global exposure. Those hedges expired during the quarter. At current pricing, upon the expiration of those hedges, we would expect an incremental $100 to $150 per ounce impact to our consolidated AISC. And we are actively evaluating hedging opportunities in the current environment.

Importantly, the updated Marigold life of mine plan published in the last tech report already reflects higher near-term diesel assumptions, so this sensitivity is embedded in our forward planning.

While these cost pressures are certainly a headwind, we remain focused on managing the controllable elements of our business and we are well positioned for a strong production and free cash flow into year-end.

Rod covered our capital returns program in detail. At the end of the quarter, we had approximately 4.9 million shares remaining under the NCIB. And at current valuations, we see a clear opportunity to complete the program in full before it expires in March 2027.

Now let's move to Slide 9 for a brief review of our financial results. Third quarter revenue was $448 million based on sales of almost 107,000 gold equivalent ounces. Average realized prices were $4,247 per gold ounce and $58.39 per silver ounce. Net income was $0.46 per diluted share and adjusted net income was $0.64 per diluted share. Our adjusted earnings per share were essentially in line with the prior quarter when adjusted for the noncash reclamation charge incurred this quarter. The main adjustment to net income was a onetime noncash increase to the cost estimate associated with water management and tailings storage at Puna.

This change reflects the completion of trade-off closure studies on the Pirquitas water management system and tailings storage facility during the quarter. Since Pirquitas is no longer operating, U.S. GAAP requires full immediate expense recognition rather than balance sheet capitalization, which is why this charge flows to the income statement in this quarter. This did not have an impact on our AISC and the $43.5 million increase net of taxes was fully removed from our adjusted earnings per share.

Free cash flow from continuing operations before changes in working capital was approximately $111 million and [ inclusive ] working capital was $6 million for the quarter. The main drivers of the working capital movement in the third quarter were increased receivables due to the timing of Puna concentrate sales and inventory build at both CC&V and Marigold.

Over the first 9 months of the year, free cash flow was nearly $305 million, or $486 million before changes in working capital. We finished the quarter with approximately $1.6 billion in cash and no debt, providing total liquidity of $2.2 billion. This cash position supported the ongoing buyback activity and will also be allocated towards the acquisition of Roxmore Resources, which we expect to close later in the fourth quarter.

Our capital allocation priorities remain clear: first, protect the balance sheet for volatility in the commodity pricing; second, invest in high-return internal growth projects; third, return capital to our shareholders; and fourth, pursue disciplined and strategic M&A. Our financial strength gives us the capacity to execute on all 4 simultaneously.

Now over to Bill to walk through the operations.

William MacNevin

Thanks, Michael. I'll first start with EHSS. In Q3, we've continued our focus on reducing risk and potential for harm across the business. Our I Care, We Care program is underway at Seabee, is being rolled out at CC&V with preparations for Q4 commencement in place for Marigold. This program enables both field risk identification and proactive reporting of near-miss events. Our safe production delivery is being enhanced by this work.

Now on to Slide 11. Third quarter production at Marigold was 29,000 ounces, bringing year-to-date production to 98,000 ounces. As previously guided, our full year forecast calls for Q4 to represent the strongest period of production in 2026. This production cadence reflects the recent completion of pumping upgrades driving increased leach pad solution flows, potential for ore stacking at cell 23B and planned inventory drawdown through the quarter.

AISC in the third quarter of $2,714 per ounce reflected higher sustaining capital spend as previously guided as well as cost pressures Michael spoke to earlier. I've already touched on the new Marigold mine plan and our excitement around the growth ahead for the asset. But it's important to note, we see significant potential for future mineral reserve additions to further support this multi-decade platform in Nevada. We're excited to get started on Buffalo Valley and look forward to providing updates on our progress across the district next year.

Now on to Slide 12 for an update on CC&V. In the third quarter, CC&V produced nearly 32,000 ounces and an AISC of $2,126 per ounce, bringing year-to-date production to nearly 98,000 ounces. Overall, CC&V continues to perform very well against expectations and has clearly established itself as a cornerstone asset in our portfolio. Work to evaluate opportunities to improve the longer-term production profile, including the potential for future mineral reserve conversion, remains ongoing.

Now on to Slide 13 to discuss operations at Seabee. Seabee produced nearly 16,000 ounces in the third quarter at an AISC of $2,094 per ounce. Third quarter operating results included scheduled downtime for the Seabee processing plant, which was deferred from the second quarter of 2026. Year-to-date production is 39,000 ounces and no further scheduled maintenance is expected before year-end. Development advance for a priority zone in the Santoy ore body is on track to support delivery of high grades in Q4. We continue to advance exploration and resource development activities at both Santoy and Porky as potential avenues for mineral reserve growth. Porky has the potential to extend the mine life at Seabee well into the next decade. And at Santoy, near-mine drilling seeks to extend our operations at the deposit.

On to Puna on Slide 14. In the third quarter, Puna produced 1.7 million ounces of silver at an AISC of $25.64 per ounce. Over the first 9 months of the year, Puna has produced 5.1 million ounces of silver at an AISC of $25.88 per ounce. At Chinchillas, mining is on schedule with ore tonnage mined being above plan, resulting in the deferral of lower-cost production from low-grade stockpiles. This is a positive development for Puna, reflecting the potential for meaningful extensions to operations that deliver steady production for Chinchillas into the 2030s.

In addition, our teams continue to advance exploration and resource development drilling at the Cortaderas project, which represents a longer-term mine life extension opportunity for Puna to complement the production profile at Chinchillas.

Now on to Slide 15 for a review of the growth pipeline. As you can see on this slide, we've continued to expand and improve our operating platforms in core jurisdictions. We have an advantage in these regions with decades of operational development and permitting experience to support growth ambitions across the portfolio.

In Nevada, our acquisition of the Converse Project will expand our land position at the northern end of the Battle Mountain trend. We've also continued to advance earlier-stage projects across North and Central Nevada, including the activity on the Dobbin joint venture project.

Similarly, in Saskatchewan, we hold a number of unexplored and prospective land positions beyond the Greater Seabee property. In addition, we're advancing the internal evaluation of the Amisk project near Flin Flon, an area that has seen a lot of positive activity in recent years. While it is too early to say how Missi might fit into our longer-term development plans, we're encouraged by recent exploration results on the property and we'll continue to explore opportunities to delineate a project that warrants its place in our extensive growth pipeline.

Elsewhere, we're continuing to advance evaluation of the long-term future of CC&V, where nearly 7 million ounces of mineral reserves present the opportunity for potential mine life extension and long-term production growth. And I've already spoken about our excitement around the extension opportunities across Puna, where further laybacks at Chinchillas and potential development at Cortaderas are beginning to delineate a production profile that extends well into the 2030s.

As you can see, we have a wealth of organic growth potential ahead. Advancing these projects delivers the best value proposition for our shareholders and we look forward to keeping the market updated on developments across the portfolio in 2027.

I'll pass back to Rod for closing remarks.

Rodney Antal

Great. Thank you, Michael and Bill. The first 9 months of the year have demonstrated consistent operating results against the backdrop and meaningful strategic change for the business. I'm proud of all we have accomplished as a team. We've refocused our business on the Americas, we've defined a multi-decade production platform in the United States and we're generating significant free cash flow and returning to our position as the leader in capital returns amongst our peer group.

So with that, operator, I'll turn the call over for questions. Thank you.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from George Eadie with UBS.

質疑応答

George Eadie

I'm just still struggling with my Marigold arithmetic again. If I look at the numbers here, you need 288,000 ounces per annum on an annualized basis, that is, for 4Q guidance, but then next year, it's 40% lower.

And I guess if I just take the tech report slightly conservative, so it's 20.5 million tonnes stacked at 0.4 and 70% recovery, I get 185,000. And even when I look at the tech report, you've got 254,000 produced, which is sort of an 83,000 ounce timing gap. Can you help us understand that a bit better, given ore stacking rates were still low in 3Q and how we sort of get to, I guess, on an annualized basis, 290,000 for 1 quarter and then back to 170,ooo. I just struggle to get the modeling to work.

Rodney Antal

Yes. I think I've got all the numbers, George. You might -- can you just go slowly through your arithmetic again? I think I caught most of it, but I want to make sure I'm answering the question properly. I think the question is when you look at what we have to do in the quarter 4 and then moving into next year dropping...

George Eadie

Yes, so when I was [ looking ] quarter 4.

Rodney Antal

Go mate, sorry.

George Eadie

You need 288,000 annualized for this quarter and then it's back to 170,000. But if I plug in the tech report numbers, like you've got 254,000 produced, which is the actual, based off timing, is 83,000 ounces lower. So I just struggle with the timing, how you're going to get this big catch-up in 4Q, but you lose it next year. And I guess, in terms of modeling for our side, it's hard to sort of get the arithmetic to work without this year sort of going crazy and 3Q ore stacking number being very low, I guess, as well. That's sort of surprised me.

Rodney Antal

Okay. Let me -- it may then be that we have to do this offline just to make sure we've got all the bases of the numbers that you're looking at. But I'll just -- I'll try to give you a high-level snapshot and then we might follow up, if that's all right with you, George.

I think for the -- for this last quarter, there were a number of enablers that will allow us to achieve what we needed to do. And that partly is the sort of time lag of quarter 4 stacking from last year into this year, what was stacked this year, what was stacked partly in the last quarter. But the key one was putting in that infrastructure for solution flow rates to increase the ability to leach the material that's already in inventory up on the pads to give us the larger fourth quarter.

As we move into next year, we've completely resequenced the mine, as you probably already know, with the new tech report with the priority initially first 2027 around the stripping that will allow us to achieve the big step change into 2028.

And primarily, the ore presentation for next year comes later in the year, not earlier in the year. So there's a bit of a change in the actual timing of ounces in the areas that we're in. Most of the ore next year comes from what's left in Valmy this year and then moving into Red Dot 3, which is a new ore source for us in 2027. So the sequence and how it rolls out, the grade profiles per month and everything else, we can sort of go through, but that's sort of at a high level, the sequence of events.

And it's actually changed quite substantially pre the last tech report, because we actually go down and come back up to achieve that overall 5-year guidance, which is fairly much intact. But it's really around stripping today for the future.

As I mentioned, the real key for us for Marigold as we look for the next 20 years is not only the ability to replace the fleet, upgrade the fleet and modernize the fleet, it's also the approach that we're taking to modernize the way that we operate the mine for operating flexibility in the future. Because as you know, Marigold historically and continue to be singly focused on maybe 1, maybe 2 faces each year.

So we're now taking that opportunity to sort of change that paradigm for the future where once we get through the initial stripping campaign over the next 18 months, we'll have 2 or 3 ore faces open at any one time, which obviously gives us a lot of flexibility as well. So there's a lot of change that's been built into the updates. But the detail, we'll reach out to you separately and try to work through it.

George Eadie

Okay. Yes. And so the stacking for 4Q, do you need to sort of be north of that 5 million tonne rate? Is that sort of what you need to get? Like the grade obviously ticked up, but do you need to get sort of north of 5 to hit guidance? Is that a sort of good guess?

Rodney Antal

It won't be, because a lot of it's going to come from quarter 4 last year, the stuff we've already stacked during the year, as well as cell 23A, which has a lot of inventory already hung up on it from the last 3 years. So between all of that and with the higher solution flow rates that we've now got going up on the pads after all that infrastructure was commissioned, that gives us the drawdowns necessary for this year's production. And then next year is a completely different story because the ounces that we're stacking for next year will be fairly light through the next 6 months.

George Eadie

Okay. And maybe just [ lastly, because we're ] on that asset, I missed earlier, because you said, but when do the hedges roll off? And is it maybe right for us to assume that you sort of call out the sequence change at Puna that Marigold and CC&V, for example, are still on track for original guidance despite sort of the input and labor and diesel pressures?

Rodney Antal

Yes. So I'd point you to -- it's obviously -- it's been something that has been upon us for the last 3 years. So it's not new. The fact is that this year, it was exacerbated by the diesel pricing going up above and beyond. On a total basis across the business, we have about 60% of our diesel under hedge. And that's always held us in good stead.

In fact, it held us obviously in great stead this year, but 40% has been exposed. So that was really a big uptick. We've also seen cost pressures in labor. The normal labor increases we plug into our budgets on a year-by-year basis for -- most of our labor is usually CPI. But more recently, we're getting lots of pressure and I think we're not the only one for professional folks where we're seeing real ratcheting of competition, which is a real risk to the industry more generally. But obviously, wage pressures are way above what we're seeing for inflation for professionals. So that's another one.

Consumables, you name it, there's been an increase in cost pressures. In the last few years, we've been able to offset a lot of that through the BI programs, which has been terrific. While we continue with BI and looking across the business of ways to be more efficient and save money, this year, it really escalated.

So for guidance for next year, when you play it out, I'd point you to the new tech report we just published for Marigold, because we did update a lot of the cost assumptions in there. And obviously, earlier this year, we did the new tech report for Cripple Creek & Victor. So they're the 2 big ones. That will give you a good basis while we're finalizing the budget for 2027 at the moment.

Well, we'll come back to you, George, on just the detailed detail as well, just so we can be a bit more granular, if you like.

Operator

The next question comes from Lawson Winder with Bank of America.

Lawson Winder

If I could just ask about the change in the unit cost guidance, just to try to appreciate some of the parts -- the moving parts from Q2 to Q3. So in Q2, 3 months ago, all-in sustaining cost was trending towards the top end of the range, which would be about 2% higher versus the midpoint. And now we're calling for about 10% above the high end.

So net-net, it's been about 12% inflation in about 6 months, but a really meaningful acceleration just in the last 3 months. Like, if you just looked at, like, 3 months ago versus today, what was the biggest item that changed that you just weren't able to appreciate then?

And then the follow-up would just be, as you look to 2027, what -- I mean, what kind of inflation rate would look like a probable and sensible assumption versus the new 2026 guide of plus 10% versus the range?

Rodney Antal

Yes. So 2 factors, Lawson, and I'll pass over to Michael. He can also talk about the cost increases. If you remember when we talked about Q2, the biggest risk was diesel and the persistent high price. That hasn't come off. And so, in fact, it actually accelerated.

And so when you look at the fact that we had 60% of our diesel usage hedged, the other 40% wasn't that's been exposed to spot. We're paying a whole lot more. And when we redid the numbers and the forecast through Q2, 3 and also obviously moving into Q4, it was a significant driver to the cost increase.

And then the other one was the decision we took to defer some of the lower-cost ounces for Puna that were coming from -- or had planned to come from the stockpiles because we were still seeing mineralization around Chinchillas. And because of that, we made sure the fleet was focused on the continuation of stripping for life of mine extensions and deferred the reclamation of those stockpile ounces.

So while they're not this year, they haven't been lost, they've just been deferred to a later time. So it's actually a good story, but it had an impact to the all-in sustaining costs as well. So that was the 2 biggest drivers.

Michael, anything else you want to add?

Michael Sparks

Yes. I think, Lawson, your other question was in relation to 2027. I think just to reiterate, the baseline, I think, to start with is the tech reports. The one that we just filed with Marigold would have already built in some of this inflationary pressure that we've seen, especially around fuel. And so if you were to take the hedges off, that's that $100 to $150 that I mentioned in the call and that gets you kind of to a good baseline of around $26.30, $26.40, which would be the 10% increase plus the $150.

And as we're kind of finalizing the budgets over the next couple of months, we'll be looking at the inflation. We'll look and see what happens after the U.S. elections in relation to diesel prices. And if we are able to be successful in rolling in a new hedge, we'll build those things with our guidance that comes out in February.

Lawson Winder

Okay. That's extremely helpful additional color. And then as we approach the reserve and resource update for year-end, I mean, I'm sure at this point, you're probably pretty close to settling on a gold price assumption for the assets for which we don't have updated technical reports, Puna and Seabee.

I mean, when you look at those 2 remaining assets, how do you think reserve replacement trends there? I mean, would you expect to replace reserves there? Or could we see a meaningful increase? I mean, particularly at Puna, but I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on Seabee as well.

Rodney Antal

Yes. Puna is obviously more silver price impacted anyway, but -- rather than the gold price. So we just updated the reserves with the new Marigold tech report.

The real key to Puna's future and we're sort of still working through it. We are working through it, not sort of, we are working through it, Lawson, on looking at ways to extend the life of mine at Chinchillas beyond what we currently know as well as the work that's going on, on the new target at Cortaderas. They're the 2 more exciting opportunities for us that will -- as soon as we've done the work and we have the drilling completed and all the technical work completed around it, we'll update the market, but it probably won't make the MRMR. If we can make it, we will, but we'll see where we get to for next year.

But clearly, there's -- we see beyond what we announced last year with the extra 4 years of mine life extension, more to come. Ideally, what would be great as an outcome is sort of a 10-year production profile. So that's what we're working towards, but we still got to finish off that piece on the Phase 8 at Chinchillas, hopefully, Phase 9 at Chinchillas and then moving into the Cortaderas project. So that's the big opportunity there for mine life extension and the increases to the MRMR.

And then also -- and also for -- when you look at Seabee, we'll be looking at completing the work at Porky to push that into development here in the next 3 to 6 months, which will be a great addition for Seabee, which will add life to Seabee as well as still looking at the extension opportunities at Santoy mine itself.

And so that's the other key part to it to adding life of those 2 assets. So they'll come from -- they'll actually come from, in some ways, more new targets and new developments rather than sort of just tweaking at the edges of the current reserves.

Lawson Winder

Okay. That's extremely helpful. And then if I could ask one final question just on M&A. Very helpful that you continue to stress what the capital allocation priorities are. It makes a lot of sense. I noticed M&A is the last.

I mean, when you list those as protect the balance sheet, internal growth, return to shareholders and then disciplined M&A, I mean, is that a forced ranking? Or should we think of all 4 of those sort of competing equally depending on returns?

And then, I mean, by implication, is there some intention to use additional cash for M&A? Or do you have flexibility in terms of how you think about M&A versus using your shares or using cash and debt?

Rodney Antal

Look, it's not -- they're not prioritized by force in the way we describe them. They're all equally important pillars for value creation and protection for the business through cycles. So I wouldn't sort of read them as a run through. That's the least of the priorities.

I think what we've demonstrated over many, many, many, many years now is a disciplined approach to M&A. And I think the reason we talk a lot about our track record, because it's important that we've been able to add value through being acquisitive for the right things. It doesn't mean that we feel compelled or at urgency around M&A at all.

I know there are -- I know we've been linked to lots of different opportunities out there in the market from time to time. But I can assure you that we haven't lost our discipline. We don't feel a sense of urgency or a drive we have to do something today to deploy capital. We'll take our time. And should we find something, we'll bring it to market. If we don't, we don't. And the pillars will run through as they normally do and we'll get focused on returning capital to shareholders and maintaining that sort of that peer-leading yield.

So overall, look, I think we've had a good track record of discipline. That doesn't change. The linkages out there in the market around us with everything else, a lot of that is just noise.

But look, when we do bring stuff, Lawson, the transaction we just announced, I'll just try and plug in because you give me an opportunity to do it. The Converse transaction, while initially, you look at it and say, well, that's -- it seems like a good, accretive transaction, it's small. That will be, in my eyes, in the medium term, when we look back, a really solid strategic option to add to the portfolio to build out the U.S. base and the portfolio. So our job post close, assuming all goes well, which I don't see any reason it wouldn't, is to take the work that -- the good work that the team have done at Roxmore, pick that up and to bring that into our way of thinking for growth opportunities.

And given its adjacency to Marigold, that's a terrific addition to the portfolio. So we're really excited by that in itself.

Operator

The next question comes from Don DeMarco with National Bank Financial.

Don DeMarco

So Rod, maybe I'll just start off continuing some of that M&A discussion. I mean, as you evaluate other M&A opportunities as you do in your normal course of business, do you have any bias toward any particular stage like -- of asset, whether that's a development asset or in-production asset, something like that would be a tack-on like you did with Roxmore, or something that's a completely new and separate asset?

Rodney Antal

Look, it's always a question of value, Don, like we always talk about. We prioritize it. Some of it's around jurisdiction. Some of it strategically doesn't make sense. Free cash flow is obviously always one of the larger influencers of the decisions that we make. So that's really the key to us.

There's a lot of -- if your question is a priority on development assets beyond Converse, no, not necessarily. We already have enough of that in the business. With the Marigold tech report that we just published, we've got quite a big change underway at Marigold over the next 18 months with the new fleet and the higher mining rates that we'll be achieving with the addition of the new fleet.

We're really focused on Cripple Creek and we had a group of your colleagues come down to that asset to really showcase and demonstrate the growth potential that, that asset has and some of the other ones I've already talked about on the call around Puna and Seabee. There's plenty to keep us busy from a development perspective in our project team. We're busy. We had Converse at the end of the year. So that part of the pipeline seems pretty full.

We did make an acquisition through a joint venture in Dobbin, which is an early stage -- really early-stage exploration play in Nevada as well this year. So they're sort of -- they're the things that we're looking at. But look, I'm not going to -- I think the business itself is terrific in terms of its shape and free cash flow.

Going into another large-scale development doesn't feel like the right next step for us. We're putting ourselves into that purgatory and that valley of despair while you bring these -- some of these large CapEx builds into production.

Don DeMarco

Okay. And so at Converse, you've got first production targeted for 2033 and CapEx is fairly light until the 2030s. So can you just remind us what the key derisking milestones are on this over the next couple of years? And what would you need in order to make a construction decision?

Rodney Antal

Yes. Look, we haven't got the project yet. So it's not that easy to talk freely about until the transaction closes here, Don. But clearly, the -- for us, it will be the technical compliance to our standards, not saying that it's bad or they haven't done a good job. In fact, we're quite complimentary of the work they've done, but there will be some things that we will focus on. Drilling, infill drilling, metallurgy confirmation, plant design ultimately of the way that we would operate the asset itself.

So nothing significant, but it will take us a bit of time to do those studies. The permitting, obviously, will be a key limiter to bringing that into production. So making sure that all the baselines are done and all the baseline studies are completed to a standard required for Nevada will be important, et cetera, et cetera. So it will be -- a lot of it's normal course, I'd say, but it will take us a bit of time to get there and that'll be the priority.

Don DeMarco

Okay. And then just a final question at Seabee. We saw a very strong grade performance in Q3. So how should we think about grade and throughput in Q4 and into 2027, particularly as Santoy and Porky development progresses?

Rodney Antal

Look, for the remainder of the year, we did hit Level 41, which was the grade pop and that's why that is really what underpins the quarter 4 performance, which will give us the higher production rate. So that was a great job by the team to do the -- have the development rates completed earlier in the year to give us access to that.

Next year, obviously, we're going through the budgets now. These spikes, as you know, aren't normal course. I wish they were. I wish we had a lot more of them, but that's part of the work we're doing at the moment, is to identify are there other structures within Santoy that might present themselves as another area of high grade. But it will go back to sort of more reserve grade moving into 2027.

And then once we complete all of the work on Porky and then present it to our Board for approvals, we'll obviously update the market on some of the questions you're asking in terms of how that plays in, what year will come into production, what needs to be done, what's the grade profile, how does it relate to production, et cetera. So that's a bit of a work in progress still.

Operator

The next question comes from Steve Green with TD Securities.

Steven Green

Most of my questions have been answered, in particular, the math around Q4 at Marigold. But just to confirm, I can understand why, given a strong Q4, you expect to make firm-wide company guidance. Can you confirm, do you also expect to make the mine guidance at Marigold, the lower end of the range at 170,000?

Rodney Antal

You mean in terms of production?

Steven Green

Yes.

Rodney Antal

Yes. That's the plan with the -- which will all be dependent on the inventory drawdown.

Steven Green

Right. Okay. Great. And just lastly, on the hedges, you mentioned the hedges rolling off this year. Do you have any in place yet for 2027 on diesel?

Michael Sparks

Not at this time. So we've been actively watching the market. We'll continue to do so as we move forward. With the elevated pricing, it hasn't opened up an opportunity to put in something that makes sense to this date, but we're actively watching it.

Rodney Antal

Yes. I think what we're hoping for, Steve, beyond the impacts of the midterms here in the U.S. today and moving to a more level playing field, hopefully, in the next week or 2 when some of this noise gets out of the system, we'll start to see what the next year looks like from diesel and then we'll make our decisions based from that point. But I think we're all hoping we're going to get some relief.

Steven Green

Okay. Great. And just finally, just quickly, you mentioned the solution flow rates. You put infrastructure in place that you recently commissioned to increase, this is at Marigold, the solution flow rates. Is that a Q4 thing? Like that -- when did that come in? When was that commissioned?

Rodney Antal

It was during Q3. We finished -- the key to it was 2 things. One was the carbon columns commissioning that we did towards the end of Q3 and also the retention pond. So we upgraded the pond so we had more ability to recycle solution around the system and capacity.

So they were all done towards the end of Q3. And that then allowed us to increase the solution flow rates to the various areas around Marigold.

Operator

This concludes the question-and-answer session and today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.